Thus said Ron Wilson on Tue, 26 Nov 2013 15:17:31 -0500: > At the same time, I find it strange to hide commits whose content is > still being used (unless "c" is just a reversion of those changes, but > then I'd just commit against "a", leaving "b" as an abandoned > fork/branch)
I too had the same thought, but it's hard to know the intent of why something was hidden when it comes to rendering the timeline display. I brought it up merely because I was able to cause it to happen with Jan's current implementation and wondered what should be the correct way to display a hidden tag that is non-propagating. It seems fairly straightfoward with a propagating hidden tag: hide the whole branch. Andy -- TAI64 timestamp: 40000000529503f1 _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
