Mike Kupfer <mike.kupfer at Sun.COM> writes: >>>>>> "Rich" == Richard Lowe <richlowe at richlowe.net> writes: > > Mike> - The named branch check looks like it just checks the name of the > Mike> current branch. So it wouldn't catch the case where somebody commits > Mike> something on a new branch, goes back to using the default branch, and > Mike> then merges with the new branch. Is there some way to review the > Mike> entries in the active list and see if any of them belong to a branch > Mike> other than "default"? > > Rich> But then they'd trip the multi-head check. > > Even if the non-default branch got merged back into the default branch?
Well, my understanding is that the attempt is to make sure the default branch does not change names, which I don't think would happen in that case. I suspect I'm missing something, however. -- Rich
