Hey Simon, > > > If so, then you're doing > > things wrong. If you have A <- B, then you should merge develop into A, > > then merge A into B. > > That's what I do. > > > If you get any more conflicts, then it's from the > > implementation of B. > > That's what I expected to happen, but I'm afraid my experience with git > is that it doesn't meet expectations. >
That is very strange... I've never had this problem. I'm assuming that after the merge, your 'git status' comes up clean (I'm also assuming your running git commands directly). If I know branch B is going to be based off A, I don't create a new branch and merge in A, but instead build off of A as a new branch. Perhaps this makes a difference (although I highly doubt it)? Actually, from looking at the commit history, something seems strange. There's some lingering commits from 15820...but again, I doubt that's the issue. Unfortunately with my knowledge, I can't help beyond this without directly seeing your machine. > > > Also if you don't get any conflicts then any branch > > which depends on B should just merge into A > > I don't understand that sentence. If C depends on B which depends on A, > why should I merge C into A? > > That's a typo, it should be "just merge in A", i.e. merge A into C. Best, Travis -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-devel" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
