Build Master: Progress toward 2.065

[David Nadlinger]

On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 13:01:50 UTC, Dicebot wrote:
> On Tuesday, 10 December 2013 at 12:57:10 UTC, Andrew Edwards 
> wrote:
>> I which case, updating with master will be counter productive. 
>> Thanks for the heads up. I will just have to rely on the devs 
>> to cherry-pick what was not originally included in the branch.
>
> cherry-picking is discouraged in that scenario as it will 
> complicate merging 2.065 branch back into master after release. 
> rebase sounds like best fit.

I'd argue that the release branches should be considered public 
history and thus never rebased. You can always just merge master 
into them...

David