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-ge...@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 <mi...@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-patc...@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 _______________________________________________ gnucash-devel mailing list gnucash-devel@gnucash.org https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-devel
