2.0.3?

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Martin Pool wrote:
> ...a fair number of things...could qualify
> for 2.0.  I wonder why they weren't proposed for it?  Like the
> following:

> * Interactive merge doesn't leave branch locks behind.  (Aaron Bentley)

This did not affect the 2.0 series.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAksmdngACgkQ0F+nu1YWqI21pACeP/X0ryLjro75YTicmhgeNV+B
TrsAn1nKs4A7Jd81Ojj8bjS4oBNN8447
=+GNw
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----