On Tue, Aug 20, 2013 at 8:33 PM, Tim Peters <tim.pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
> [Tim, wondering why the 3.2 branch isn't "inactive"] > >> ... > >> What is gained by _not_ merging here? I don't see it. > > [Antoine Pitrou] > > Perhaps Georg doesn't like merges? ;-) > > I suppose what's gained is "one less command to type". > > So let's try a different question ;-) Would anyone _object_ to > completing the process described in the docs: merge 3.2 into 3.3, > then merge 3.3 into default? I'd be happy to do that. I'd throw away > all the merge changes except for adding the v3,2.5 tag to .hgtags. > > The only active branches remaining would be `default` and 2.7, which > is what I expected when I started this ;-) While I would think Georg can object if he wants, I see no reason to help visibly shutter the 3.2 branch by doing null merges. It isn't like it makes using hg harder or the history harder to read.
_______________________________________________ Python-Dev mailing list Python-Dev@python.org http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
