If we had something like that, then we could still have the general rule:

Everything put in 4.5 must be merged to master (but the person to merge
would have to decide if they just need to do a --record-only kind of merge).

On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 6:29 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:

> Maybe we need something like this in Git (maybe it's already there?):
>
>
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/18074697/subversion-mark-as-merged-without-changing-anything
>
> The ability to record a commit has having been merged to another branch,
> but nothing was really merged.
>
> Then when you checked code into 4.5 that shouldn't be in master, you
> simply do a merge --record-only (in SVN terminology).
>
> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:37 PM, Mike Tutkowski <
> mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com> wrote:
>
>> If we just did merges (instead of cherry picks) to 4.5, does Git allow us
>> to ONLY merge that particular (merge) commit from 4.5 to master?
>>
>> In other words, I'd want to make sure we were only merging from 4.5 to
>> master what we want to (and, as I mentioned earlier, not bring along
>> commits to 4.5 that should not be in master).
>>
>> In SVN you could do a sort-of "empty" merge from branch x to a later
>> branch (or set of branches), which basically told SVN that that commit was
>> not supposed to be brought forward. Then when the next person came along
>> and committed to branch x and merged forward, SVN would not take your
>> changes along for the ride.
>>
>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 3:30 PM, David Nalley <da...@gnsa.us> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 10:05 AM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>> > not nice, so merge back is no longer an option. I think I am almost
>>> > ready to admit to that.
>>> >
>>> >
>>>
>>> I came to that conclusion a week or so ago.
>>> If we could keep master as the release branch until we were imminently
>>> releasing, it might not be an issue. But people don't seem to want to
>>> treat master as a release branch under feature freeze. So we end up
>>> branching - and the two start diverging (rapidly) - at best we can
>>> cherry-pick to keep the two similar.
>>>
>>> --David
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *Mike Tutkowski*
>> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
>> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
>> o: 303.746.7302
>> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
>> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
>>
>
>
>
> --
> *Mike Tutkowski*
> *Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
> e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
> o: 303.746.7302
> Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
> <http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*
>



-- 
*Mike Tutkowski*
*Senior CloudStack Developer, SolidFire Inc.*
e: mike.tutkow...@solidfire.com
o: 303.746.7302
Advancing the way the world uses the cloud
<http://solidfire.com/solution/overview/?video=play>*™*

Reply via email to