Abhijit Menon-Sen <ams@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > At 2008-08-11 11:47:01 -0700, gitster@xxxxxxxxx wrote: >> >> I do not think that story is a good example. > > I agree, it's a stretch. > > I can't think of any better rationale for the change than "It might > conceivably be convenient to someone at some point", which falls a > fair bit short of being convincing. > > To be honest, it took so little time to implement this suggestion that > I didn't realise until later that there was no realistic use-case and > nothing to say about the patch. Oh, that's Ok. I think my "cherry-picking from devel to maint1 and then cherry-picking the same change to maint2" example already shows the potential usefulness of the patch. Yes, cherry-picking the change from maint1 would avoid conflicts, but we do not _have to_ force the user to think about it. If the user somehow chose to cherry-pick from devel to maint2, it is certainly better if we allowed the earlier resolution applied. In any case, thanks for the patch --- queued in 'pu' for now. -- 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
