Hi,
Quoting "Ron Mayer" <rm_pg@cheapcomplexdevices.com>:
> Seems you'd want to do is create a new branch as close to the point
> where the bug was introduced - and then merge that forward into each
> of the branches.
Thank you for pointing this out. As a fan of monotone I certainly know
and like that way. However, for people who are used to CVS, lots of
branching and merging quickly sound dangerous and messy. So I'd like
to keep things as simple as possible while still keeping possibilities
open for the future.
Note that a requirement for daggy fixes is that "the bug is fixed
close to the point where it was introduced". So fixing it on the
oldest stable branch that introduced a bug instead of fixing it on
HEAD and then back-porting would certainly be a step into the right
direction. And I think it would be sufficient in most cases. If not,
we can still enhance that and used daggy fixes later on (as long as we
have a conversion that allows merging, that is).
Regards
Markus Wanner
