From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Junio C Hamano Subject: Re: Gitk feature - show nearby tags Date: Sat, 03 Jun 2006 09:50:46 -0700 Message-ID: <7vy7wedvyx.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> References: <17537.22675.678700.118093@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> <7vslmm8rcd.fsf@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net> <17537.32585.260926.48759@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Cc: git@vger.kernel.org X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sat Jun 03 18:50:59 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1FmZKt-0007Xz-8J for gcvg-git@gmane.org; Sat, 03 Jun 2006 18:50:51 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751738AbWFCQus (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:50:48 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751745AbWFCQus (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:50:48 -0400 Received: from fed1rmmtao01.cox.net ([68.230.241.38]:21377 "EHLO fed1rmmtao01.cox.net") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751731AbWFCQur (ORCPT ); Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:50:47 -0400 Received: from assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net ([68.4.9.127]) by fed1rmmtao01.cox.net (InterMail vM.6.01.06.01 201-2131-130-101-20060113) with ESMTP id <20060603165046.ZKR19284.fed1rmmtao01.cox.net@assigned-by-dhcp.cox.net>; Sat, 3 Jun 2006 12:50:46 -0400 To: Paul Mackerras In-Reply-To: <17537.32585.260926.48759@cargo.ozlabs.ibm.com> (Paul Mackerras's message of "Sat, 3 Jun 2006 22:23:37 +1000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110004 (No Gnus v0.4) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Paul Mackerras writes: > ... I think that with heads, you > would want to see all the descendent heads, rather than just the > nearest ones (those that aren't descendents of another descendent > head) as I do with tags. What do you think? If one head is a > descendent of another, and both are descendents of the selected > commit, should I show both? That would be useful I think. >> BTW, what's the maintenance/rewind policy on the "new" branch of >> gitk.git? If you are never going to rewind it, I could pull it >> in "next" (and keep pulling your "master" in my "master") for >> wider exposure if you like. > > I intend to pull "new" into "master" shortly, assuming I don't get any > bug reports for the "new" branch. :) > > If you pull my "new" into your "next", and you then pull your "next" > into your "master", and I pull my "new" into my "master", and you pull > my "master" into your "master", won't we end up with duplicate merges? Yes, but I rarely if ever pull "next" as a whole into "master".