Does fork notification really warrant another setting? If there is a fork on some other branch either fix by merging it or rename one of the legs. There is no sensible need for a fork to exist in a timeline that I can think of. Forks are rare in most repos (the intensely busy repos I deal with seem to be the exception). Given these points surely a fork warning is a harmless or at worst mildly annoying rare occurrence so please make it the default behavior or make it non-configurable.
On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 8:25 AM, Andy Bradford <amb-fos...@bradfords.org> wrote: > Thus said Jan Nijtmans on Mon, 13 Apr 2015 10:59:38 +0200: > > > - 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. > > I asked a question a few days ago about whether this kind of > notification should be opt-in (e.g. a setting that is disabled by > default). I never got feedback on it. > > > - The function primary_parent_pid_from_rid() is not used anywhere. > > Yes, thank you, I forgot to remove it. It became obsolete after using > fossil_find_nearest_fork was written. :-) > > Thanks, > > Andy > -- > TAI64 timestamp: 40000000552bdff7 > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users >
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
