Package rebuilds for gcc bug https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=634757

[Tim Waugh]

On Tue, 2010-10-05 at 15:27 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> PPS  I did not modify my bump script yet to attempt a commit to master
> and merge to the f14 branch.  In the interest of time, I took the easy
> route and just did commits to the f14 branch.  Maintainers can do a
> merge and fixup after the builds have been done if they wish to have
> their branches in sync with master once more.

For this sort of thing I would have thought that separate commits on
whichever branches need changing would be fine.  Git's merging (if/when
each maintainer decides to merge branches) ought to be able to handle
that.

I don't think that merging "backwards" from master to f14 would be a
good idea.  Wouldn't that bring "rawhide"-y changes into f14?  For
example, ghostscript's master branch uses ghostscript-9.00 -- merging
master into f14 would cause havoc.

Or have I misunderstood what you are saying?

Tim.
*/

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20101006/ff6107e0/attachment.bin