From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Thomas Rast Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] Add branch management for releases to gitworkflows Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:59:01 +0100 Message-ID: <200911181559.02873.trast@student.ethz.ch> References: <1258055164-11876-1-git-send-email-rocketraman@fastmail.fm> <200911151807.15726.trast@student.ethz.ch> <4B033D8F.1080309@fastmail.fm> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: Nanako Shiraishi , , , To: Raman Gupta X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Wed Nov 18 16:00:59 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1NAm1M-0008TI-VV for gcvg-git-2@lo.gmane.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:00:37 +0100 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1754248AbZKRPAT (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:00:19 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753199AbZKRPAT (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:00:19 -0500 Received: from gwse.ethz.ch ([129.132.178.237]:39437 "EHLO gwse.ethz.ch" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753223AbZKRPAR (ORCPT ); Wed, 18 Nov 2009 10:00:17 -0500 Received: from CAS01.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.235) by gws00.d.ethz.ch (129.132.178.237) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 16:00:08 +0100 Received: from thomas.localnet (129.132.153.233) by mail.ethz.ch (129.132.178.227) with Microsoft SMTP Server (TLS) id 8.2.176.0; Wed, 18 Nov 2009 15:59:47 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.12.3 (Linux/2.6.27.37-0.1-default; KDE/4.3.3; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: <4B033D8F.1080309@fastmail.fm> Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Raman Gupta wrote: > > I *am* a native English speaker. Sadly, its the *only* language I > speak, read, and write. However, additional comments would > definitely be nice. Oh, my apologies. I just looked at the names and jumped to conclusions from there. > Agree. I reworded the sections to untangle the information > somewhat. Let me know what you think. [...] > * `git merge --ff-only master` > ===================================== > [...] > +If the merge fails because it is not a fast-forward, then it is > +possible some fixes on 'maint' were missed in the feature release. > +This will not happen if the content of the branches was verified as > +described in the previous section. Yes, I think that is nicer. It's no longer a repetition of what was said above, but merely points out what could have gone wrong and where to look for advice. The last sentence sounds a bit like "ha ha we told you so!" though ;-) FWIW, you can add my Acked-by: Thomas Rast to the final (squashed) patch. -- Thomas Rast trast@{inf,student}.ethz.ch