Skip to content

Latest commit

 

History

History
51 lines (37 loc) · 2.22 KB

File metadata and controls

51 lines (37 loc) · 2.22 KB

Unresolved branches on origin

Three remote branches are neither merged into main nor safe to assume are obsolete. This note exists so the next person meets a recorded fact instead of a puzzle.

Branch Commit Size against main
agent/production-sync-scan-counters 24a0fd8 Expose production sync scan counters 7 files, +234 / −32
agent/reliable-shell-sync-noop a5671e9 Restore shell compatibility and skip converged scans 8 files, +1078 / −91
agent/suppress-sync-self-events 558f094 Suppress delayed sync self-events 1 file, +551 / −38

Measured on 2026-08-04 against main at 5999384.

What is known

Each branch is a single commit. None is an ancestor of main, so git branch --merged will never list them and ancestry alone will never retire them.

They belong to the af8fb02 line — the four pull requests (#25, #26, #28, #29) that were not merged into main directly. That line was instead absorbed by a separate reconciliation, which preserved the behaviour while arriving at it by a different route. main is therefore believed to contain the substance of all three.

What is not known

Nobody has proven that. "Absorbed by a different route" is a claim about behaviour, not about commits, and no one has gone branch by branch to confirm that every change in each one is represented in main today.

The diffs are large and main has moved a long way since, so a three-dot diff answers nothing on its own: it shows divergence from a shared ancestor, not missing behaviour.

Why they are still here

Deleting a remote branch that is not an ancestor of main is not reversible for anyone but the person who still has it locally. Keeping a branch costs nothing. Tidiness is not worth an irreversible action on evidence that is only probably right.

Verifying equivalence is real archaeology and needs judgement per branch. Nobody needs these branches today, so that cost has not been paid.

What to do if you care

Do not delete them on the strength of this note. Either prove per branch that main covers the behaviour — and record the proof here — or leave them alone. If you prove it, say which commit in main covers each one, then delete.