| From: | Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Cc: | Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>, Ron Mayer <rm_pg(at)cheapcomplexdevices(dot)com>, Marko Kreen <markokr(at)gmail(dot)com>, Greg Stark <stark(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>, Aidan Van Dyk <aidan(at)highrise(dot)ca>, Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Magnus Hagander <magnus(at)hagander(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
| Date: | 2009-06-06 20:30:24 |
| Message-ID: | 4A2AD1E0.1020901@bluegap.ch |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi,
Tom Lane wrote:
> There are a number of possible reasons, but here are a few that hold for me:
Thank you for this very good collection. I'm still wondering about
what's the best way to represent this in git (or others). Cherry-picking
is arguably the simplest variant. Maybe that can be combined with
merging to preserve merge capability. I'll try that...
> So there are a lot of good reasons to work backwards in patching.
Agreed and understood. However, there are good reasons for keeping merge
capability between branches intact as well. I still hope we can get both
somehow, if not, I'm certainly accepting that backward patching is more
important.
Regards
Markus Wanner
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Markus Wanner | 2009-06-06 20:56:47 | Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up |
| Previous Message | Dimitri Fontaine | 2009-06-06 20:08:47 | Re: pg_migrator issue with contrib |