Comment 15 for bug 390502

On Fri, 24 Jul 2009 13:47:01 Robert Collins wrote:
> On Fri, 2009-07-24 at 01:30 +0000, Ian Clatworthy wrote:
> > > Taking that document as a lead, the approach seems to be to switch the
> > > development focus so that stacked branches can be left untouched.
> > > Do we still need to upgrade stacked branches then?
> >
> > Not completely sure but I suspect not, at least not all of them.
> >
> > For outstanding reviews say, we may want to upgrade those. After
> > upgrading the branch locally, just pushing again (with a new name?)
> > ought to do it.
>
> We hsould be able to just upgrade the trunk in-place, and then upgrade
> the branches in-place. Why mess around with extra copies etc that just
> have to be cleaned up?
>
> -Rob

Because when last checked, upgrading a branch that others are stacked on
breaks the others, and the others can't be upgraded.