On Apr 29, 2012, at 7:51 AM, Stefan Fuhrmann wrote: > Another such case that I ran into recently is > with reverse-merging changes. Those "un-merged" > revisions seem not to re-appear on the "eligible > for merge" list. Don't remember the specifics, though.
I seem to recall that that was a conscious decision: if the user performed a reverse-merge to undo a change, then the user has made a conscious choice and doesn't want to have to keep reverse-merging that change every time the branches might otherwise be sync'ed together.
