Hi Junio, On Tue, 24 Apr 2018, Junio C Hamano wrote: > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > >>> base-commit: b46fe60e1d7235603a29499822493bd3791195da > >> > >> Basing your work on the tip of 'next' is good for discussion, but > >> not readily usable for final application. Let me see if I can > >> untangle the dependents to come up with a reasonable base. > > > > I'll queue this on top of a merge of 'dj/runtime-prefix' into 'master'. > > Merging the resulting topic into 'next' and applying these patches > > directly on top of 'next' result in identical trees, of course ;-) > > Actually, these trivially rebase on top of dj/runtime-prefix, so > I'll queue them like so without taking it hostage to other things in > 'master'. We'd want to keep these mergeable to any integration > branch that dj/runtime-prefix would be merged to, so that is the > most logical organization, I would think, even though I do not > immediately see the reason why we would want to merge > dj/runtime-prefix to 'maint' and lower right now. > > Thanks. Thank you, and sorry for the trouble. I am just too used to a Continuous Integration setting with exactly one integration branch. I will make an effort in the future to figure out the best base branch for patches that do not apply cleanly on `master` but require more stuff from `next`/`pu`. Ciao, Dscho
