On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 01:22:29PM +0000, Jon Leighton wrote: > On Thu, 2011-11-17 at 14:50 -0800, Aaron Patterson wrote: > > On Thu, Nov 17, 2011 at 10:30:13PM +0000, Jon Leighton wrote: > > > Jon fixes a bug in master. It's a minor thing and not hugely relevant to > > > the 3.2.0 release, so there is no changelog entry. > > > > > > SCENE 3 > > > > > > Jon backports the fix to 3-1-stable. It's more relevant there as it will > > > feature in the forthcoming point release. So the changelog is updated: > > > > You can't for sure know that you'll backport from master to 3-1-stable. > > Also, if you do port to 3-1-stable and someone reverts, now your > > changelog entry is lost. I think this suffers exactly the same > > problems I mentioned in the original post. > > No, you don't know for sure when you'll backport. But when you do, you > don't have to change master as well. So when you backport, you create a > new change in 3-1-stable, containing a) the fix and b) a CHANGELOG entry > for 3-1-stable.
This means that your merge is no longer just a cherry-pick. > When it gets reverted in the 3-1-stable, your changelog entry was in the > backport commit, so that gets reverted too. So if you revert on 3-1-stable, then do you need to add a changelog entry to master? If it was changelog worthy for 3-1-stable, surely it should be changelog worthy on master. -- Aaron Patterson http://tenderlovemaking.com/
pgp3KygHZ9QrJ.pgp
Description: PGP signature
