On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Howard Miller <howard@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I now want to update all my customer branches with the latest fixes > and patches. Naively, I would just check out each branch and merge the > stable branch - job done. Yep, that's what I'd do. > However, is it sensible to ask if there is a > way to say that the stable branch is more important if there are > conflicts. Not really. The git approach is to assume that... when there is a conflict, you must look into it. A human needs to take a decision... > Or should I be using rebase instead (which I still don't > really understand). I'm trying to reduce my workload as there are > loads of branches to do. No, rebase will increase the load and complexity. cheers, m -- martin.langhoff@xxxxxxxxx martin@xxxxxxxxxx -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html