I just noticed that I'm currently getting a disconnected graph in
monotone-viz. Am I alone in this? Olivier, can you remind me how to
generate some debugging output for you?
Cheers,
Richard
--
Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 26 Oct 2005 09:23:52 +0200 (CEST),
Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
richard I just noticed that I'm currently getting a disconnected
richard graph in monotone-viz. Am I alone in this? Olivier, can you
richard remind me how to generate
Nathaniel Smith [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[Some interesting pointer ommitted, which I will
read when I am online again]
On Wed, Oct 26, 2005 at 12:34:54AM +0200, Wim Oudshoorn wrote:
rev A.. XXX
branch main
\/
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED] on Wed, 26 Oct 2005 10:53:17 +0200, Olivier
Andrieu [EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
oliv__a Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker [Wednesday 26 October 2005] :
oliv__a
oliv__a richard I just noticed that I'm currently getting a
oliv__a richard disconnected graph in
Bruce Stephens [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[...]
Or increase the weightings given to the last few edges? That feels
like it has a chance of working, and being reasonably easy to code.
I just tried that by hand, dumping the graph by setting
MONOTONE_VIZ_DEBUG=dot, and editing it in doted, and
Nathaniel Smith wrote:
people who haven't yet internalized
monotone's model of branches are dazed and confused at the idea of a
revision that is in no branch, and we should try to not confuse such
people when we can avoid it. There's a tension, in general, where a
system should simultaneously
Zbynek Winkler [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
What would be the clear and consistent model this time? I also like
clear and consistent models but I think this time it is not as
clear... IMHO clear and consistent model could be if each branch had
exactly one branch point (one revision in each
So, err, here's a stupid idea that popped into my head, reading the
recent discussion of 'disapprove'. I want it to be clear that this is
not a here's something I've been thinking about for 3 months and
it's going to solve 5 problems you hate and 5 you never even knew you
had kind of message,
On Wed, 2005-10-26 at 17:05 -0700, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
It might make doing trust stuff significantly easier. I _think_ a
design criterion for a trust system is that I want to be able to
specify rules for trusting certs that aren't branch certs, and I want
to do this per-branch. This seems
