Fri, 02 Dec 2022 18:04:37 +0100 peer: dissolve `_peerlookup` into its last two callers
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 02 Dec 2022 18:04:37 +0100] rev 49749
peer: dissolve `_peerlookup` into its last two callers This is about to need more changes and the function won't be useful. We do it early to clarify later changes.
Sat, 03 Dec 2022 03:45:45 +0100 peer: stop having a `peer()` method on `peer()`
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Sat, 03 Dec 2022 03:45:45 +0100] rev 49748
peer: stop having a `peer()` method on `peer()` This is already a peer, why do you want a peer if you already have one.
Sat, 03 Dec 2022 03:45:39 +0100 clone: explicitly detect the need to fetch a peer
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Sat, 03 Dec 2022 03:45:39 +0100] rev 49747
clone: explicitly detect the need to fetch a peer Instead of having `peer()` method on all `peer()` for this usecase, we could simply handle it explicitly.
Fri, 02 Dec 2022 19:15:04 +0100 addbranchrevs: explicitly detect the need to fetch a peer
Pierre-Yves David <pierre-yves.david@octobus.net> [Fri, 02 Dec 2022 19:15:04 +0100] rev 49746
addbranchrevs: explicitly detect the need to fetch a peer Instead of having `peer()` method on all `peer()` for this usecase, we could simply handle it explicitly.
(0) -30000 -10000 -3000 -1000 -300 -100 -30 -10 -4 +4 +10 +30 +100 +300 +1000 tip