On Fri, 13 Jan 2012 12:52:48 -0800, Jameson Graef Rollins <jrollins@finestructure.net> wrote: > > Doesn't everything need to be merged into master eventually anyway? It > seems to me that unless it's a change that very narrowly targeting an > issue in a release branch that is not an issue in master, every patch > will ultimately need to be applied to both. It doesn't really make > sense to me to apply a change to one branch and not the other, if they > will eventually need to be applied to both anyway. The following two sequences of commands apply the same changes, but result in a different history graph. 1) notmuch checkout release && git am patch && \ notmuch checkout master && git cherry-pick release 2) notmuch checkout release && git am patch && \ notmuch checkout master && git merge release well, they apply the same changes if release was an ancestor of master when the they both began.