On Sun, 11 Mar 2012 19:02:42 -0300, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
Here is a revised version. Let's pretend there were all kinds of useful
discussions in some other medium that led to this.
Rebasing the single patch and sending it to the BTS started to be a bit
boring, so I have
On Tue, 06 Mar 2012 01:13:26 -0400, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:10:48 -0400, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
One thing I think I got wrong in round 1 is the blanket use of
--ancestor-path. Consider the following branch structure, where
upstream
One thing I think I got wrong in round 1 is the blanket use of
--ancestor-path. Consider the following branch structure, where
upstream has been merged into master several times.
upstream
---0.
\__A_\B___C_ master
On Mon, 05 Mar 2012 22:10:48 -0400, David Bremner brem...@debian.org wrote:
One thing I think I got wrong in round 1 is the blanket use of
--ancestor-path. Consider the following branch structure, where
upstream has been merged into master several times.
Here is a revised version. Let's
4 matches
Mail list logo
