Hi, Tom Lane wrote: > There are a number of possible reasons, but here are a few that hold for me:
Thank you for this very good collection. I'm still wondering about what's the best way to represent this in git (or others). Cherry-picking is arguably the simplest variant. Maybe that can be combined with merging to preserve merge capability. I'll try that... > So there are a lot of good reasons to work backwards in patching. Agreed and understood. However, there are good reasons for keeping merge capability between branches intact as well. I still hope we can get both somehow, if not, I'm certainly accepting that backward patching is more important. Regards Markus Wanner -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
