Message178983
| Author |
chris.jerdonek |
| Recipients |
chris.jerdonek, eric.araujo, ezio.melotti, ncoghlan, pitrou, sandro.tosi, terry.reedy, tshepang |
| Date |
2013年01月03日.20:03:35 |
| SpamBayes Score |
-1.0 |
| Marked as misclassified |
Yes |
| Message-id |
<1357243415.51.0.806143516887.issue14468@psf.upfronthosting.co.za> |
| In-reply-to |
| Content |
One thing that occurred to me is that it is often or usually not sufficient to go from 2.7 to 3.2 and on forward because applying a patch made against the default branch loses information if first applied to an earlier branch. The given workflow assumes no loss of information and so should probably note this constraint.
I usually craft my patch against the default branch. If applying to 2.7 or 3.2, etc. loses information (which has been more often the case for me), then instead of merging I null-merge and reapply the original patch. Should the recommended workflow cover this possibility? |
|