On Monday, March 10, 2014 9:01:52 AM UTC, Simon King wrote: > > Up to now, in the above situation, I would *not* merge new_branch into > the updated develop and call the result again new_branch, since I was > too often told that this is changing history
No, that is not changing history. You are just adding a merge commit in the reverse of the usual order. If you merge develop into my_branch then parent1=my_branch and parent2=develop in your merge commit. If you switch to develop, merge in my_branch, and then rename develop->my_branch then parent1=develop and parent2=my_branch. Both just add a merge commit on top of my_branch, so history is preserved. The customary (and hence slightly easier to understand later on) option is the first one, which also requires fewer git commands. > Instead, I would merge the updated develop branch into > new_branch, and push to trac if needed (otherwise do git reset --hard > HEAD~). -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "sage-release" 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-release. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
