Git commit in all available branches

Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus) forum at hubbitus.com.ru
Tue Oct 12 08:02:24 UTC 2010


 11.10.2010 21:26, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Oct 2010 09:07:17 +1000
> Jeff Fearn <jfearn at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>> On Fri, 2010-10-08 at 13:56 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>>> On Fri, 08 Oct 2010 18:03:04 +0400
>>> "Pavel Alexeev (aka Pahan-Hubbitus)" <forum at hubbitus.com.ru> wrote:
>>>
>>>>  In most cases I try sync all branches if there no real reasons to
>>>> make differences.
>>> ...snip... 
>>>
>>> I would hope a real reason would be that the update is not a
>>> security or bugfix only update, right? 
>> IMHO it depends on what kind of software it is.
>>
>> I push releases of applications to all current Fedora releases. The
>> users want the new features, it's what they have been bugging me for.
>>
>> If I was working on glibc or X I might not do that, but applications
>> should be pushed back unless there is some system level constraint
>> preventing it.
>>
>> So I too would like a "commit to all branches" or "sync all branches
>> to this one" command. 
> If it doesn't change the user experience, and fixes bugs or security
> issues, then great. ;) If it's a major update which does change the
> user experience, breaks ABI/API, or adds a bunch of new functionality,
> then please don't. 
>
> kevin
Off course.

I really did not want start again this flame war. Off course I also have
packages where branches does not synced. I only ask how I can accomplish
such task where it possible.


-- 
With best wishes, Pavel Alexeev aka Pahan-Hubbitus. For fast contact
with me you could use Jabber: Hubbitus at jabber.ru


More information about the devel mailing list