2015-04-13 6:31 GMT+02:00 Andy Bradford <amb-fos...@bradfords.org>: > It's not yet merged to trunk, but I have borrowed from Jan's work and > merged into the sync-forkwarn branch for what I think will provide a > better experience (e.g. almost no false positives). > > I say almost none, because it's possible that if your sync is cut-off, > you may end up with a node that has a fork which has already been > merged, but for which you didn't receive the correction (what are the > odds?). > > But on the whole, I think this is much more reliable: > > https://www.fossil-scm.org/index.html/info/d0e2f1bd3e71ebf6 >
Just two remarks: - I'm not sure if I want to be reminded when someone else causes a fork on a branch I'm not working on. But if there is such a desire with other people, I'm not principally against it. - The function primary_parent_pid_from_rid() is not used anywhere. I went ahead, so the fork detection for fossil update/status/info (I din't hear anyone against that) will receive some more wide-spread testing. I'll do more testing on the "sync-forkwarn". Any more feedback welcome! Regards, Jan Nijtmans
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users