On 13 May 2013 17:15, Jed Brown <[email protected]> wrote:

> Martin Sandve Alnæs <[email protected]> writes:
>
> > Of course, but in bzr, you could "merge" a range of changesets without
> > the ancestors, which meant applying the patches introduced by those
> > changesets, effectively the same as cherry-picking in git.
>
> I'm not familiar with bzr, but are you talking about "merging" ranges in
> the "Cherrypicking" section here?
> http://doc.bazaar.canonical.com/beta/en/user-guide/adv_merging.html



Yes. From what Garth said I think he tried to do that kind of "merge" with a
single commit and it _seemed_ to work because the ancestors were shared.


> Jed: so is it _never_ ok to make even simple fixes directly in
> > next/master/maint?
>
> You can make simple fixes (e.g., .gitignore and doc fixes) on 'master'
> or 'maint', but not on 'next' because 'next' is rewound after a release
> (discarding everything that was in 'next', re-merging any topics that
> failed to graduate).  The only non-merge commits made directly in 'next'
> should be those reverting something that was later determined to be a
> bad idea or needed to be reworked significantly.
>

Ok, thanks.

Martin
_______________________________________________
fenics mailing list
[email protected]
http://fenicsproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fenics

Reply via email to