On 12/12/14 11:45 AM, Andres Freund wrote: > On 2014-12-12 11:42:57 -0500, Robert Haas wrote: >>> I think the amount of effort a simple renamed directory which wholly >>> contains a binary creates is acceptable. Just use patch -p4 instead of >>> patch -p1... >> >> That is fine if you are manually applying a patch that touches only >> that directory, but if the patch also touches other stuff then it's >> not as simple. > > I think backpatchable commits that touch individual binaries and other > code at the same time are (and ought to be!) pretty rare. > >> And I don't know how well git cherry-pick will follow >> the moves. > > Not well if the patch is done in master first.
It does work. I have tried it with the changes I'm working on. There might very well be limits to the cleverness of these tools, but if you know of a fundamental reason why this would be a problem, let's please hear it. -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
