Re: reject merges on gdb release branches?

[Doug Evans <xdje42@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Jan 23, 2014 at 11:57 PM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2014 08:36:25 +0100
>> From: Ricard Wanderlof <ricard.wanderlof@axis.com>
>> CC: "brobecker@adacore.com" <brobecker@adacore.com>,
>>       "gdb-patches@sourceware.org" <gdb-patches@sourceware.org>
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Jan 2014, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>>
>> >>
>> >> I think it's not the merging per se that is a problem, only if it is done
>> >> incorrectly, i.e. merging from a branch that was was broken off from
>> >> master a long time ago, which brings in a lot of unwanted stuff.
>> >
>> > There's any number of ways one can make a mistake and screw up master.
>> > That cannot be the reason for forcing a particular workflow on
>> > everyone, certainly not before any such problems actually happened
>> > even once.
>> >
>> > And I don't understand your fear of unwanted stuff from a divergent
>> > branch: what exactly is special about this situation?  Surely,
>> > examining the diffs before committing and pushing would show what is
>> > about to land on master, so where's the danger that doesn't exist in
>> > any other commit?
>>
>> I'm not trying to advocate one or the other, rather just trying to
>> understand the reasoning behind the decision.
>
> So am I.  And I still don't understand that reasoning.
>
> Let me turn the table and ask: are there any objections to removing
> this restriction on master, and leaving it only on the branch?  If
> there are no objections, can we please remove the restriction?

fwiw, for now at least this git newbie likes the restriction on master
and release branches.