Bruno Haible <br...@clisp.org> writes: > Sam James wrote: >> It's metadata in addition to the >> commit summary (matching based on a title isn't easy, it's way easier if >> someone says "here's the commits it's based on"; one can give multiple >> such lines). > > It would significantly increase the amount of work for maintaining a stable > branch. No, thanks.
Sure, no worries. I wasn't aware of your workflow and just wanted to make the suggestion. > >> it makes life far easier if investigating a bug. > > The way I check whether a certain bug fix is present is > 1. to get the fix from master, > 2. find a particular code line / hunk that is essential for the fix, > 3. look if this change is present in the branch. > > This is more reliable than to look at the git log or ChangeLog, because > when a patch has not been applied correctly in the branch (due to > rejects, maybe) there is a mismatch between the advertised list of fixes > and the actual list of fixes. Thanks! best, sam
