Re: Handling of the actively-maintained branches (master, stable-2.0)

[Ludovic Courtès]

Hi Andreas,

Andreas Rottmann <address@hidden> writes:

> I wonder how this generally should be handled -- I think the most
> appropriate way would be to commit any changes that can go into the
> stable release into stable-2.0 (only), and then, at "convenient times"
> (perhaps always before committing new, not-for-stable stuff to master)
> merge stable-2.0 into master.

Yes, agreed.

> It probably doesn't matter, as git seems to handle duplicate changes
> quite well (just tried, except for a conflict in GUILE-VERSION,
> stable-2.0 merged cleanly into master, even with the duplicate
> changeset).  Thoughts?

Looks like the most convenient approach to me, so let’s do it this way
if nobody disagrees.

Thanks,
Ludo’.