2009/8/26 Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org>: > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 08:55:44PM +0200, demerphq wrote: >> 2009/8/26 Nicholas Clark <nick@ccl4.org>: >> > On Wed, Aug 26, 2009 at 03:29:58PM +0200, Rainer Tammer wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> please could someone with commit right apply the attached patch to >> >> maint-5.8 ? >> >> If there will ever be a 5.8.10 then the suidperl problem would be fixed... >> > >> > Whilst agreeing with the intent, I disagree with the mechanism. >> > >> > Someone should cherrypick the correct patch from maint-5.10. >> > They shouldn't cold apply patches to a branch, as git then fails to track >> > what is not yet merged. >> >> Er, I dont get it. Cherry picking /is/ applying patches. If the exact >> same patch is applied by hand to two branches git will not know >> whether it has been done by rebasing, cherry-picking or by hand. It is >> all the same to git (message details aside, which git does not look >> at.) > > We can't guarantee that it is the same patch, if it's sent via a mailing > list and applied. (Hateful whitespace). Whereas "please cherry pick ${hash}" > is reliable in the face of format F-word. Aha. :-) Good point. However the point remains. The actual process by which an identical patch is applied to two branches matters not at all to git. >> Also, IMO, and I say this only because 5.10.1 is out now, I think >> patches for 5.8 should go to 5.8 first and THEN be applied to blead if >> necessary. In fact, its arguable we should just start collecting topic > > This is a patch already in the maint-5.10 branch I was speaking generally. >> branches. And then rebase them into the other branches as needed. Then >> there is no need for the "which patches have been back ported, etc" >> type tracking. Either the topic branch has been merged/rebased into >> the branch, or it has not. > > We substitute it with manually tracking "which branches have been merged"? This is a considerably easier task than "what patches have been cherry-picked,and or munged to be applied to a different branch" as the task essentially involves checking that a particular commit /message/ is in the branch. It ignores the code involved, and is relatively easy to manage as a process. I dont know if you have worked with topic branches. If not then I suggest you play with it a bit. It makes life MUCH easier. cheers, Yves -- perl -Mre=debug -e "/just|another|perl|hacker/"Thread Previous | Thread Next