In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Tue, 05 Sep 2006 13:51:58 +0100, Bruce Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
monotone> Bruce Stephens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: monotone> monotone> [...] monotone> monotone> > But you're right that that probably means get_current_revision_id is monotone> > a bit wrong: maybe it ought to be get_base_revision_id or something? monotone> monotone> Shows how out of touch I am. There is such a thing, of monotone> course (called get_base_revision_id). You and me both, bud. I completely missed that one, and didn't read Zack's mail well enough (he does mention get_base_revision_id!)... Sorry for the stirr, folks! monotone> I guess the question is should there be a special case for monotone> when there's no changes, so that get_current_revision_id monotone> returns the same as get_base_revision_id? (My hunch is that monotone> it doesn't matter, so it may as well be left as it is.) Since there is get_base_revision_id, I don't care any more :-). Cheers, Richard ----- Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://richard.levitte.org/ "When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up." -- C.S. Lewis _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
