[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Incorrect merge
From: |
Davis Herring |
Subject: |
Re: Incorrect merge |
Date: |
Tue, 2 Nov 2010 10:44:07 -0700 (PDT) |
User-agent: |
SquirrelMail/1.4.8-5.el5_4.10.lanl3 |
> Another problem with your branch approach is that a patch applied
> (mistakenly) to emacs-23 rather than to emacs-common would end up lost.
> It's a lot easier to detect excess patches and lost patches.
Could we restrict emacs-23 so that only the merges (and explicit
maintainer action) could update it? The number of branch-only patches is
small; it might not be too much trouble to rely on just a few people to
commit them.
Davis
--
This product is sold by volume, not by mass. If it appears too dense or
too sparse, it is because mass-energy conversion has occurred during
shipping.
- Re: Incorrect merge, (continued)
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Jason Rumney, 2010/11/01
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Andreas Schwab, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Stefan Monnier, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge, Óscar Fuentes, 2010/11/02
- Re: Incorrect merge,
Davis Herring <=