From da6e86d37166e8c5111a158930ec56be71c85c06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Junio C Hamano Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2018 14:37:25 -0800 Subject: [PATCH] MaintNotes: clarify the purpose of maint->master upmerge Even though the paragraph before this one is pretty clear that topics are first merged to 'master' and then to 'maint', it was misleading to say 'maint' is merged to 'master' to propagate fixes forward, as most of the time, such an upmerge is a noop because topics merged to 'maint' are usually merged to 'master' already. These up-merges are done primarily to make sure that the tip of 'master' has updated release notes from all the maintenance tracks, so be explicit about that to avoid confusion. Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano --- MaintNotes | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/MaintNotes b/MaintNotes index 3a70b882b5..393d81f3cc 100644 --- a/MaintNotes +++ b/MaintNotes @@ -173,8 +173,8 @@ feature release). These days, maintenance releases are named by incrementing the last digit of three-dotted decimal name (e.g. "2.12.1" was the first maintenance release for the "2.12" series). -New features never go to the 'maint' branch. This branch is also -merged into "master" to propagate the fixes forward as needed. +New features never go to the 'maint' branch. It is merged into "master" +primarily to propagate the description in the release notes forward. A new development does not usually happen on "master". When you send a series of patches, after review on the mailing list, a separate topic -- 2.47.3