On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 08:10 +0000, Andrew Bennetts wrote:
> The linked branch adds a hook that is intended to address this. It
> doesn't address "there may need to be some sort of ordering, e.g.
> interactive merges may want to always be last, after automated ones",
> but maybe that's not necessary initially, although it does sound like a
> good improvement to do at some stage.
On Fri, 2009-12-18 at 08:10 +0000, Andrew Bennetts wrote:
> The linked branch adds a hook that is intended to address this. It
> doesn't address "there may need to be some sort of ordering, e.g.
> interactive merges may want to always be last, after automated ones",
> but maybe that's not necessary initially, although it does sound like a
> good improvement to do at some stage.
BTW - cool... is this still unlanded?
-Rob