Re: Merge priority

From: Martin Langhoff <martin.langhoff@gmail.com>
Date: Nov 26, 2009, 16:22 UTC
Message-ID: <46a038f90911260822x3cf5fcd1ka7e503764cae699c@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <26ae428a0911260444j45437a92r47d7f2e8b292829e@mail.gmail.com>

On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:44 PM, Howard Miller <howard@e-learndesign.co.uk> 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,

-- 
 martin.langhoff@gmail.com
 martin@laptop.org -- School Server Architect
 - ask interesting questions
 - don't get distracted with shiny stuff  - working code first
 - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff