gnucash-docs master: Correct field format in python-import-fields.

[John Ralls]

On Jun 5, 2014, at 6:21 AM, Geert Janssens wrote:

> On Thursday 05 June 2014 11:10:44 Mike Evans wrote:
>> On Thu, 05 Jun 2014 09:58:25 +0200
>> 
>> Geert Janssens <janssens-geert at telenet.be> wrote:
>>> On Monday 02 June 2014 07:39:57 Mike Evans wrote:
>>>> Updated	 via 
>>>> https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-docs/commit/f3dbb107
>>>> (commit) from
>>>> https://github.com/Gnucash/gnucash-docs/commit/6a5083c3 (commit)
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> commit f3dbb1071c46d409f4d7ecf060cb2c279572ed42
>>>> Author: Mike Evans <mikee at millstreamcomputing.co.uk>
>>>> Date:   Mon Jun 2 12:53:01 2014 +0100
>>>> 
>>>>    Correct field format in python-import-fields.
>>>> 
>>>> Summary of changes:
>>>> guide/C/ch_import_business_data.xml | 14 +++++++-------
>>>> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>>>> 
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> gnucash-patches mailing list
>>>> gnucash-patches at gnucash.org
>>>> https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-patches
>>> 
>>> Mike,
>>> 
>>> Shouldn't this change have gone into the maint branch ?
>>> 
>>> It looks like a bugfix to me. Or does it fix something that's only
>>> wrong on the master branch ?
>>> 
>>> Geert
>> 
>> Hi Geert.
>> 
>> Yes it probably should.  Do I merge this or cherry-pick into maint?
>> 
>> Mike E
> 
> Mike,
> 
> I think cherry-picking is cleaner in this case. That's what the git workflow document 
> proposes as well.
> 
> It won't cause any issues for a future merge from maint to master either because git will 
> detect the patch is already on master and will just skip it.

Merging master->maint would pull everything, including the C++ changes into maint. We don't ever want to do that. Always merge *into* maint, but if you need to get commits *from* maint, always cherry-pick.

I've added a note to the Git wiki page to that effect.

Regards,
John Ralls