On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 04:15:24PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote: > It's stuff like this that I hate working in side branches :/ while > development continues in the master. At some point, the decision has to > be made to switch development, just maintain the old with needed bug > fixes in a renamed side branch.
I agree that maintaining a patch series is a pain, but I think the solution is to get your changes merged into master. What's the point of creating a dead-end branch in either direction? Cheers, Trevor -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
