bf6ca looks very much like a potential accidentally orphaned commit. Did mistachkin commit his changes thinking they were on the branch branch-3.7.16 and part of the merge that led to sessions? Maybe, maybe not. The commit should be inspected and either merged, closed or named to a different branch.
The other fork candidates I'd agree seem to be false positives. On Sat, Apr 25, 2015 at 5:57 PM, Andy Bradford <amb-fos...@bradfords.org> wrote: > Thus said Richard Hipp on Sat, 25 Apr 2015 16:54:51 -0400: > > > https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?c=763d2bc74b&unhide > > https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?c=7d445e593a&unhide > > https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?c=cbea02d938&unhide > > https://www.sqlite.org/src/timeline?c=bf6ca21b36&unhide > > > > None of those look like forks to me.... > > This seems to be a legitimate bug. They don't look like forks to me > either. > > Andy > -- > TAI64 timestamp: 40000000553c3807 > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
