-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Bridgman, John wrote:
> Dave's comments implied that there is a policy against fixing bugs in > master then cherry picking 'em to stable; your comments implied > master-first plus cherry pick is OK but you feel that fixing in > stable and merging back to master is a *better* way of working. > > Is it fair to say that if a developer is working in master and > notices a potential bug fix then it's OK to fix in master and > cherry-pick that fix to one or more stable branches afterwards, but > if the "primary task" is fixing a bug (particularly a big discovered > in stable) then fixing first in the stable branch is preferred ? Mixing cherry-picking and merging is bad because the same commit will end up in the log multiple times. If you commit to master, cherry-pick to 7.8, and merge back to master, the commit will appear in the log of master two or three times. This is confusing at best. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkvbOiwACgkQX1gOwKyEAw+0EwCeIP2Ytf/lXQoE6wFsTl9K7PEr mRoAn3+JyJMRkRcro6rKZGJC+gvp2j8x =5xoJ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ mesa-dev mailing list mesa-dev@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/mesa-dev
