Chris Jerdonek added the comment: One thing that occurred to me is that it is often or usually not sufficient to go from 2.7 to 3.2 and on forward because applying a patch made against the default branch loses information if first applied to an earlier branch. The given workflow assumes no loss of information and so should probably note this constraint.
I usually craft my patch against the default branch. If applying to 2.7 or 3.2, etc. loses information (which has been more often the case for me), then instead of merging I null-merge and reapply the original patch. Should the recommended workflow cover this possibility? ---------- _______________________________________ Python tracker <rep...@bugs.python.org> <http://bugs.python.org/issue14468> _______________________________________ _______________________________________________ Python-bugs-list mailing list Unsubscribe: http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-bugs-list/archive%40mail-archive.com
