On Dec 19, 07 06:07:15 -0800, Dan Nicholson wrote: > > I'm not sure what we'd gain in exchange for losing history. At the very > > least, I think such branches should be preserved in a separate > > legacy/history repository. > > I guess I wasn't considering the historical side of things. What I was > considering is that if you clone mesa, you get a ton of branches, and > it's difficult to know what's relevant now.
I very much agree on that. Partially, this is a problem with git, which does not show you which of the branches are already completely merged into another branch (read: might be dead). Of course these branches could still be active, and just accidentally be merged into a different branch at this point of time, so this is only a hint. My 2 cents Matthias -- Matthias Hopf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> __ __ __ Maxfeldstr. 5 / 90409 Nuernberg (_ | | (_ |__ [EMAIL PROTECTED] Phone +49-911-74053-715 __) |_| __) |__ R & D www.mshopf.de ------------------------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Check out the new SourceForge.net Marketplace. It's the best place to buy or sell services for just about anything Open Source. http://ad.doubleclick.net/clk;164216239;13503038;w?http://sf.net/marketplace _______________________________________________ Mesa3d-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/mesa3d-dev
