Received: from localhost (unknown [200.46.208.211]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4EA26338A8 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:45:27 -0300 (ADT) Received: from mail.postgresql.org ([200.46.204.86]) by localhost (mx1.hub.org [200.46.208.211]) (amavisd-maia, port 10024) with ESMTP id 34550-01 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:45:06 -0300 (ADT) X-Greylist: from auto-whitelisted by SQLgrey-1.7.6 Received: from svr2.hagander.net (svr2.hagander.net [88.198.128.226]) by mail.postgresql.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C444632DC3 for ; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 11:45:24 -0300 (ADT) Received: from dynamic.hagander.net ([127.0.0.1]) (encrypted and authenticated) by svr2.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93F08DCD458; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 16:18:11 +0200 (CEST) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mha-laptop.hagander.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A99B01241D8; Wed, 3 Jun 2009 16:18:10 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <4A268622.90608@hagander.net> Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2009 16:18:10 +0200 From: Magnus Hagander User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.21 (X11/20090409) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Robert Haas CC: Greg Stark , Andres Freund , Markus Wanner , Marko Kreen , Aidan Van Dyk , Heikki Linnakangas , Andrew Dunstan , PostgreSQL-development Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Developer meeting minutes up References: <20090526144812.GC15213@yugib.highrise.ca> <20090602162333.369974jcc3jpn3dx@mail.bluegap.ch> <20090602180702.15986cp384yo3l7q@mail.bluegap.ch> <20090603131004.12934iyrr4f7rlsc@mail.bluegap.ch> <4136ffa0906030508i2971790dk54a8203ee03ed196@mail.gmail.com> <4A266A56.2020703@anarazel.de> <4136ffa0906030701x200bf0e4o4c77fa3239062ca5@mail.gmail.com> <4A2684FC.2070006@hagander.net> <603c8f070906030717h267221c3uc7f0d971ae82b0b2@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <603c8f070906030717h267221c3uc7f0d971ae82b0b2@mail.gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Maia Mailguard 1.0.1 X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.077 tagged_above=0 required=5 tests=AWL=0.077 X-Spam-Level: X-Archive-Number: 200906/309 X-Sequence-Number: 139364 Robert Haas wrote: > On Wed, Jun 3, 2009 at 10:13 AM, Magnus Hagander wrote: >>> I'm not sure whether we should mark the old branches getting merges >>> down or the new branches getting merged up. I suspect I'm missing >>> something but I don't see any reason one is better than the other. >> If you go from older to newer, the automatic merge algorithms have a >> better chance of doing something smart since they can track previous >> changes. At least I think that's how it works. >> >> But I think for most of the changes it wouldn't make a huge difference, >> though - manual merging would be needed anyway. > > In practice, isn't it more likely that you would develop the change on > the newest branch and then try to back-port it? However you do the > import, you're going to want to do subsequent things the same way. That's definitely the order in which *I* work, and I think that's how most others do it as well. -- Magnus Hagander Self: http://www.hagander.net/ Work: http://www.redpill-linpro.com/