Hi,
Stephen Leake wrote:
Logically, those are not "branches"; they are now part of mainline. So
it would be more correct to say :
I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Even if they got merged later
on, those are still "branches of development".
> You will get revisions that used to be on a branch but are now on
> mainline.
Their branch cert didn't change. Even after a merge, most revisions of
the branch will still carry only *one* branch cert - that of the branch.
Thus I fail to see how those should now "be on mainline".
You'd only save sync'ing 'new' development branches.
Which is a good thing.
Really? If I'm interested enough in a project to want to fetch it's
development history (!), I'm at least as interested in all current
branches, as I am interested in history. I've never taken the effort to
strip away branches I might not be interested in (heck, how should I
even know?).
But that's just me. Let's hear other people's preferences here!
Regards
Markus
_______________________________________________
Monotone-devel mailing list
Monotone-devel@nongnu.org
http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
