Argh. New problem with branches

[Benoit Boissinot]

On 9/13/07, Jesse Keating <jkeating at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:21:00 -0400
> >
> > Now why would that be?  There are no other changes on the 'default'
> > branch, so this change shouldn't create a new head, it should just
> > commit to the default branch.
>
> Ping, is this a bug I'm seeing or am I doing something wrong here?  I"d
> really like to continue using mercurial, but if I can't work out this
> branching stuff I have to move on :/

This is a bug in hg, the network stuff isn't really aware of named
branches, it will only notice that the number of heads changes.

regards,

Benoit