Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: mtn:// sync

[Markus Schiltknecht]

Hi,

Stephen Leake wrote:
> Logically, those are not "branches"; they are now part of mainline. So
> it would be more correct to say :

I don't quite follow your reasoning here. Even if they got merged later 
on, those are still "branches of development".

>     You will get revisions that used to be on a branch but are now on
>     mainline.

Their branch cert didn't change. Even after a merge, most revisions of 
the branch will still carry only *one* branch cert - that of the branch. 
Thus I fail to see how those should now "be on mainline".

> > You'd only save sync'ing 'new' development branches.
>
> Which is a good thing.

Really? If I'm interested enough in a project to want to fetch it's 
development history (!), I'm at least as interested in all current 
branches, as I am interested in history. I've never taken the effort to 
strip away branches I might not be interested in (heck, how should I 
even know?).

But that's just me. Let's hear other people's preferences here!

Regards

Markus