RFC: dealing with dead, anonymous feature branches

[Dirkjan Ochtman]

On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 19:34, Martin Geisler <mg at aragost.com> wrote:
> I discussed this idea with Jan Sørensen from aragost and I had at some
> point mentioned that we're "afraid" of many heads because the number of
> heads is a term in the running time of some of our protocols. He
> suggested that one could make a "canonical dead head", that is, merge
> all dead heads until there is only a single dead head in the graph.

I think this is the important bit, it potentially alleviates a bunch
of perf issues. We should get this before we argue about the other
things.

Cheers,

Dirkjan