On Sat, Jun 01, 2013 at 04:15:24PM -0700, Brian Dolbec wrote:
> It's stuff like this that I hate working in side branches :/  while
> development continues in the master.  At some point, the decision has to
> be made to switch development, just maintain the old with needed bug
> fixes in a renamed side branch.

I agree that maintaining a patch series is a pain, but I think the
solution is to get your changes merged into master.  What's the point
of creating a dead-end branch in either direction?

Cheers,
Trevor

-- 
This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org).
For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy