From: Pete B. <pb...@gm...> - 2010-04-20 15:58:56
|
On 2010.04.20 16:33, Michael Plante wrote: > Oh sure, but you're not sharing history with those; you've generally just > cherry-picked instead of merging OR rebasing. Yes, because whatever has already been applied to official doesn't need to be broken down in any of our branches, since our branches are meant for merging back with official. The goal is to keep a clean master, and anything we pick from official will be ignored when merged back, which is why I don't have a problem cherry picking and squashing anything that comes from official into a single commit. If you think that's a bad idea, I can abstain doing so, but I think it leaves my tree clearer (just like the commits from my tree that are squashed/massaged in merge2 for official). > And we do have conflicts with > some of those changes that we've already taken the trouble to resolve. Do you mean you currently have conflicts from my squashed official merge commit + residual (r267/268)? The only thing I should have changed there, that didn't come from official, is bump the version minor from 6 to 7 in the new vars we use in configure.ac. The rest of the commit diff should be 100% official changes, so if you applied the same changes, we should end up with the same tree. If not, just let me know what you guys want me to do. Regards, /Pete |