"private-kvp" merge reverted other changes since November.
clanlaw at gmail.com
Tue May 13 16:12:10 EDT 2014
On 13 May 2014 18:39, Mike Alexander <mta at umich.edu> wrote:
> In the other direction, I think that once a topic branch is merged to master it should be abandoned (unless it is used to fix bugs in the stuff that was just merged). A new topic branch should be created for subsequent changes, even if they are related to the changes that were just merged (such as the same changes to a different part of the code). I'm not sure if this is what you're suggesting or not, but it would seem to avoid a ladder appearance (if I know what you mean by that).
Working with git in the past I have considered that topic branches
should be as short lived as possible. A piece of work should be
broken into a number of self contained chunks and each one done on a
branch, merged back to trunk, and left. The next chunk being started
on a new branch. Of course this is not always possible as sometimes
major changes are required which must all be done before the s/w
reaches a new consistent state. In that case merging will always be
More information about the gnucash-devel