Re: Merging 2.3-staging

2016-05-28 Thread Richard Heck 
On 05/28/2016 05:41 AM, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Samstag, den 28.05.2016, 05:30 -0400 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
>> To branch 2.2.x can't we always do
>>
>> git branch 2.2.x 2.2.0
>>
>> regardless of whether 2.3-staging was merged into master?
> You're right, I didn't think of that possibility.

Branched and merged stuff. Will send another email.

Richard

Re: Merging 2.3-staging

2016-05-28 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller 
Am Samstag, den 28.05.2016, 05:30 -0400 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> To branch 2.2.x can't we always do
> 
> git branch 2.2.x 2.2.0
> 
> regardless of whether 2.3-staging was merged into master?

You're right, I didn't think of that possibility.

Jürgen

> Scott

Re: Merging 2.3-staging

2016-05-28 Thread Scott Kostyshak 
On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 11:21:22AM +0200, Jürgen Spitzmüller wrote:
> Am Freitag, den 27.05.2016, 22:03 -0400 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> > Since I've never done this before, can someone confirm that all we
> > have
> > to do is
> > 
> > git checkout master
> > git merge 2.3-staging
> > 
> > ?
> 
> What needs to be done first, in any case, is branching 2.2.x.

Is there a git reason this must be done first? I suppose it makes sense
because that is the most important thing, but I'm wondering if you meant
more that that.

To branch 2.2.x can't we always do

git branch 2.2.x 2.2.0

regardless of whether 2.3-staging was merged into master?

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: Merging 2.3-staging

2016-05-28 Thread Jürgen Spitzmüller 
Am Freitag, den 27.05.2016, 22:03 -0400 schrieb Scott Kostyshak:
> Since I've never done this before, can someone confirm that all we
> have
> to do is
> 
> git checkout master
> git merge 2.3-staging
> 
> ?

What needs to be done first, in any case, is branching 2.2.x.

Jürgen

Merging 2.3-staging

2016-05-27 Thread Scott Kostyshak 
Since I've never done this before, can someone confirm that all we have
to do is

git checkout master
git merge 2.3-staging

?

I did this locally and I think it went pretty well. There were three
conflicts, none of which seems complicated to resolve.

Richard since you did the commands for the branching, please feel free
to go ahead with the merging if you feel more confident than I.

Scott


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature