Subject: Re: Specifying revisions in the future

From: Miles Bader <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 06 Feb 2012 13:28:25 +0900

Andreas Schwab <[email-masked]> writes:
> The rule should be to follow the leftmost parent as far as possible.
> That means that X+2->D is B.

It might also be reasonable (and safer -- the user may not actually
realize when there's an ambiguating branch-point) to simply have it
abort with an error ("ambiguous future-ref specification") when
there's any doubt...  I suspect most uses would be very simple "+1"
etc., and not crossing branch points.

-miles

-- 
`There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio,
 Than are dreamt of in your philosophy.'