On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 14:33, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote:
> Alex Hunsaker <badalex@gmail.com> writes:
>> How exactly patches get applied into back branches?
> There was discussion about that before, but I don't know whether we
> really have a solution that will work comfortably.
I don't either, not being a -commiter I don't really follow that area much :-)
> A couple of
> comments:
>
> * My practice has always been to develop a fix in HEAD first and then
> work backwards. I'm going to resist any tool that tries to force me
> to do it the other way.
Yep, I agree and as you pointed out it does not work anyway (in the
sense of being able to keep the same commit id/hash) because you end
up needing to change things.
> I'd be satisfied with a tool that merges commit reports if they have the
> same log message and occur at approximately the same time, which is the
> heuristic that cvs2cl uses.
I dont think it would be to hard to code that up (main worry is it
might be dog slow). BTW the point about git cherry-pick -x is that it
includes the original commit hash in the commit message. That way we
don't have to do any guess work based on commit time and log message.