On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 06:26:59PM -0400, Kyle Meyer wrote: > Oleh Krehel <ohwoeo...@gmail.com> writes: > > > Why not just cherry-pick the commits from master onto maint, or the > > other way around? That would result in no merge commits. > > The result of doing that is IMO worse than many merge commits. For each > fix in maint, you'd end up with two commits that are linked only by a > patch id (if there are no conflicts) and perhaps a reference in the > message (e.g., if -x is used and there are no conflicts). Merging > allows you to manage a large set of changes, including conflicts, > between upstream and downstream branches and to be sure about which > commits a branch contains.
Indeed! It's one of Git's upsides, why fight it? > I think cherry picking should be limited to one-off cases where a fix > lands in master and then it is later realized that it's needed in maint. Well said. -- Suvayu Open source is the future. It sets us free.
