Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > "Shawn O. Pearce" <spearce@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > >> If we can add a test case to demonstrate the existing breakage, I think we > >> can (and should) cherry-pick it to 'maint'. > > > > Yes, it probably should have gone to maint. No, it didn't go there. > > Temporary lapse in maintainer judgement. > > That is Ok. I do the same all the time (and I try to rewind and rebuild > when I spot it before pushing the results out, but I am not always > successful). Oh, trust me, I had many times where I had to rebuild everything for that day's push because I forgot about a patch that should be in maint. At least your Meta/RB and Meta/PU scripts make it somewhat painless, that and Git's ability to just hard reset a branch back to what I last published. ;-) I just utterly failed to do it that morning. Or at least failed to do it for this change. > I just wanted to see if there was any particular reason not to have this > on 'maint'. Nope. -- Shawn. -- 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
