On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Kathy Lussier
<email address hidden> wrote:
> A more general question. Liam's branch fixes the reported bug, which is
> worthy of backporting, but it also has a new feature quality with the
> addition of the batch updater to the selection list. When the problem
> with the org unit selector is worked out, is it okay to backport it
> since it has a bug fix or should we only merge it to master for
> inclusion in 2.10?
Not commenting on the specific patch here, but in general, if a bugfix
is most conveniently made in a way that effectively adds a small new
feature by activating a new path to existing code, I think it is
reasonable to backport it. (Provided, of course, that the new feature
actually works; backporting TODOs should of course be avoided.)
On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Kathy Lussier
<email address hidden> wrote:
> A more general question. Liam's branch fixes the reported bug, which is
> worthy of backporting, but it also has a new feature quality with the
> addition of the batch updater to the selection list. When the problem
> with the org unit selector is worked out, is it okay to backport it
> since it has a bug fix or should we only merge it to master for
> inclusion in 2.10?
Not commenting on the specific patch here, but in general, if a bugfix
is most conveniently made in a way that effectively adds a small new
feature by activating a new path to existing code, I think it is
reasonable to backport it. (Provided, of course, that the new feature
actually works; backporting TODOs should of course be avoided.)