Michael J Gruber wrote: > I don't quite understand how cherry picks could conflict less then > merges if the release branch contains fixes only. The last time I experienced a painful merge from f-release to master, it was because some files had been culled from master but left extant on f-release. Not too hard to resolve, actually. But I really only needed one change pulled into master, and when I cherry picked instead of merging the whole branch, there were no conflicts, and master ended up containing exactly what I wanted. > My impression is that "f-release" actually > mixes release engineering and maintenance. Two possible remedies: > > - Separate release engineering from maintenance and merge only the > latter to master Ah, thank you! This is invaluable advice. I think I'll go with this option since mixing release engineering and maintenance is exactly what I'm doing. Hopefully it's worth the added complexity of having another public branch. I pushed an example to https://github.com/meonkeys/releaseBranchDemo that I'll share with my developers. "git merge -sours" will definitely be something useful to add to the quiver too. -- 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