On Wed, 07 Jun 2006 02:10:13 +0530, Michael W Thelen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
Madan U S wrote:
Dan : I think hidden makes sense and is less verbose. Are you -1 if
hidden is used? If so, pl. let me know (hey, I cant face the wrath of a
committer, you know ;)
[[[
Implement 'svnmerge hidden'.
'svnmerge hidden' will list all the revisions marked as blocked, against
the default or a given head (given by the -S/--head options).
* contrib/client-side/svnmerge.py
(action_hidden): New function to handle the 'svnmerge hidden' command.
(command_table): Added new Option for handling the 'hidden'
subcommand.
]]]
PS : this patch assumes that the patch submitted at
http://www.orcaware.com/pipermail/svnmerge/2006-April/000534.html has
already been applied.
Thanks for the patch... if no one comments on it, I'll file an issue for
it in the issue tracker.
Hey, Mike. No need. Theres has been a little bit of disconnect here. The
patch was discussed at [email protected] and given up in favor of
'svnmerge avail -B'.
Those mails didnt make it to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
/me wonders about the cross-postings and subsequent disconnects...
Regards,
Madan.
_______________________________________________
Svnmerge mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.orcaware.com/mailman/listinfo/svnmerge
