![](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/e082379a5052f8ee80b69779ecb634c5.jpg?s=120&d=mm&r=g)
i think follow_master_commits is better than follow_commits (and better
than following_master)
/Jonas
On Fri, Nov 14, 2014 at 11:31 AM, Kristian Nielsen wrote: Pavel Ivanov I'd say "following_master" will be very confusing, because degree of
parallelization on slave won't match degree of parallelization on
master in this case. Just because some commits are in different commit Right, that was my original concern as well. With two of us, there will
probably be other users who would find it confusing. and that will take much more time combined. So it can be hardly called
"following master". "follow_commits" could be more appropriate. Maybe "follow_master_commits", as Serg suggested? Not _too_ long, and
seems to
better describe what is going on. Thanks, - Kristian. _______________________________________________
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
Post to : maria-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~maria-developers
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp