On 25 Jan 2005 22:45:13 +1100, Matthew Palmer wrote: > > It would be nice if sealed branches were automatically categorised > differently to ordinary branches; I'm thinking that marking them 'hidden' > might be a bit too much, but a new 'sealed' type would be quite handy.
If you noticed, archmag does not access the archives, it works completely from the tree logs. So determining sealed partners is possible except for the ones that became sealed since the last merge from them. I may add a new role "sealed" for the sealed partners, but I think it should be automatically categorised only after you select it, not to make the archmag startup slower, especially with the large number of partners. The whole partner categorization thing is currently preliminary and needs some good think. If you send me revision coordinates of the tree you work with (the one with a lot of partners), then maybe I could see your case and needs better. > I guess you could go extra nuts and automatically do a blank commit --seal > if you set a branch to sealed, but I can see the downsides to doing that. Yes, I see the downsides too. :) Regards, Mikhael. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
