On 06/02/2009 06:33 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> At the same time, I don't really buy the theory that relating commits on
> different branches via merges will work. In my experience it is very
> seldom the case that a patch applies to each back branch with no manual
> effort whatever, which is what I gather the merge functionality could
> help with. So maybe there's not much help to be had on this ...
You can do a merge and change the commit during that - this way you get
the merge tracking information correct although you did a merge so that
further merge operations can consider the specific change to be applied
on both/some/all branches.
This will happen by default if there is a merge conflict or can be
forced by using the --no-commit option to merge.
Andres
