the -x would only add it to the comment making it harder to find. As for
multiple stable branches; merging forward always folows all branches
forward so a fix on 4.9 would be merged forward to 4.10 and then 4.10 would
be merged forward again to 4.11 and finally to master. of course there is
always work to do in terms of solving merge conflicts but these are
generally less then port work as the order of any commits to the
intemediats is always preserved.
On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 6:15 PM, Rene Moser <m...@renemoser.net> wrote:
> Hi Daan
> On 02/14/2018 05:26 PM, Daan Hoogland wrote:
> > Rene,
> > The issue is certainly not due the git workflow but to upgrade schemes we
> > have.
> > The result of this workflow for us is that it is easier to find to which
> > branches a particular commit is added as by merging forward the commit id
> > of the actual fix doesn't change. so instead of looking in each branch
> > a bit of code you can look for a commit id on a branches log.
> Ah I see.
> However, the same can be achieved by adding -x to cherry-picks (to add
> the origin commit id), without the downside that a fix can "only" go
> into one stable branch.
> Keep in mind, we certainly do have more than one stable branch at a time
> (4.11-lts, 4.12). A fix should be applicable to any stable branch.
> Or how would this work with the current workflow?