RetroSearch Browse

Sat Mar 16 23:02:35 CET 2013 · https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124714.html

On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 11:48 PM, Terry Reedy <tjreedy at udel.edu> wrote:
> The FAQ says "...  using hg merge 3.3 as usual." Serhiy's commit message
> said 'Null merge', which to me is not 'as usual', as there are extra steps
> given in the FAQ above. So, do he really do a 'null merge' and is that the
> right thing to do in this situation?
>

It's probably just a matter of terminology.  I assume he did a "usual
merge" (i.e. "hg merge 3.2; hg ci -m '...';") and call it "null merge"
because there was no code that changed.  I prefer to use the term
"null merge" when I explicitly revert the code before committing, and
in this case I would have used "Merge with 3.x.".

FWIW I might add http://bugs.python.org/issue15917 at some point, to
prevent these situations.

Best Regards,
Ezio Melotti

> I have no doubt the the extra merges are needed ;-).

Home - News ( United States | United Kingdom | Italy | Germany ) - Football scores

Showing content from https://mail.python.org/pipermail/python-dev/2013-March/124714.html below:

[Python-Dev] [Python-checkins] cpython (merge default -> default): Merge heads default.