Markus Schiltknecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: >> I don't think making net.venge.monotone mean >> {net.venge.monotone,net.venge.monotone.*} is a good idea either. >> When I ask for net.venge.monotone that is what I want, not it and >> all of its children. > > Really? > > Well, you will get those branches which have been propagated back as > well, anyway.
Logically, those are not "branches"; they are now part of mainline. So it would be more correct to say : You will get revisions that used to be on a branch but are now on mainline. > You'd only save sync'ing 'new' development branches. Which is a good thing. I have examples/display_branches.lua installed, so I get a count of revisions per branch. I can see deciding to only pay attention to a subset of branches, or only to mainline, at some point. The point is not _only_ to save time during sync, but also to avoid logical clutter. 'ls branches' would be faster, and easier to sort thru, for example. >> If I want all of its children, I can explicitly ask for those too. >> In fact, I have never wanted all of its children. > > Guess it's a matter of taste. I mostly want to sync a complete project. > > Part of my point was, that you cannot easily sync 'a branch and all of > its children' correctly, because * matches anything. To be on the save > side, you currently have to say: > > "net.venge.monotone" "net.venge.monotone.*" That seems natural to me. > (which would *not* match "net.venge.monotone-foo", which I don't want, > because that's not a child branch of "net.venge.monotone"). That works for me as well. -- -- Stephe _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel