On Friday 21 March 2008, Derek Scherger wrote: > Markus Schiltknecht wrote: > > So, I'm proposing to get rid of the asterisk entirely, making > > "net.venge.monotone" mean: that branch and "net.venge.monotone.*" (but > > not "net.venge.monotone-foo". I'm assuming that's what you want most of > > +1 > > > the time anyway. If you really want to sync only "net.venge.monotone" > > and none of it's children, you'd have to explicitly exclude them. So it > > The thing is, you are very likely going to get the children anyway, at > least those that have been merged back so the only thing you'll be able > to exclude are the branch certs themselves. I wonder if being able to > "exclude" things like this is really worth he trouble since it often > won't do what you might expect anyway.
Any time this comes up, I wonder again, what was the argument for including revs that are ancestors of revs you want to sync, but at then excluding their branch certs? I always found this counterintuitive. So to me, making "net.venge.monotone" mean "net.venge.monotone.*", does look like an ugly hack to match user's expectations here without addressing the real issue. Regards, Thomas -- Thomas Moschny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
