Re: Questions about get_most_inclusive_end_rev()

2011-11-21 Thread Julian Foad
Paul Burba wrote: > You are correct, the doc string had it backwards.  I fixed that. [...] > I removed the check and then, since get_most_inclusive_start_rev() and > get_most_inclusive_end_rev() are almost identical, I combined the two > into a new function get_most_inclusive_rev. > > All the above

Re: Questions about get_most_inclusive_end_rev()

2011-11-21 Thread Paul Burba
On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 7:06 AM, Julian Foad wrote: > Hi Paul. > > Glad to see from some recent commits that you still have an eye in the > merge code. > > I'm stumbling a bit on get_most_inclusive_end_rev().  The doc string says: > >    'If IS_ROLLBACK is true the oldest revision is considered th

Questions about get_most_inclusive_end_rev()

2011-11-19 Thread Julian Foad
Hi Paul. Glad to see from some recent commits that you still have an eye in the merge code. I'm stumbling a bit on get_most_inclusive_end_rev(). The doc string says: 'If IS_ROLLBACK is true the oldest revision is considered the "most inclusive" otherwise the youngest revision is.' But the