Excerpts from Jeremy Huddleston's message of Tue Oct 13 13:34:52 -0700 2009: > > but since I can't commit to master by policy (merge to master from > feature branches), and I don't have an apple feature branch tracking > master (since I'm waiting for Peter's documentation on the best > practices for that), the only place I could put them in git for you > was on my 1.7 branch... but I assure you I'm actually using them on > master myself.
Ok, so the other 'official' way to get patches into master is to just post them to the list using git format-patch and git send-email. I'm happy using git am -s on patches posted here; it's actually less work for quick stuff than using git cherry-pick. Rebasing rather > than merging would make it easier to generate incremental patches, but > that is "bad" for people tracking your branch since they can't fast- > forward. Right, rebasing is mean. Of course, I don't quite understand why merging would generate anything different in the way of a patch, but perhaps there's something funny with how svn does merges? -- [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ xorg-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.x.org/mailman/listinfo/xorg-devel
