In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> on Mon, 3 Dec 2007 23:18:36 -0600, "Matthew D. Fuller" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> said:
fullermd> Richard, fullermd> fullermd> > [...] How do other mtn-using projects do this? [...] fullermd> fullermd> Any thoughts on this? Cert-less revs seem like they have fullermd> bad side effects even aside from the seeming semantic fullermd> imprecision, but all these obvious alternatives are pretty fullermd> messy... Didn't I already comment on this? Actually, I don't have much experience from other mtn-using projects except for monotone itself. Quite honestly, I don't really see a problem, except for the fact that things look a bit weird in mtn-viz. (oh, and you mean "branch-less revs", right? ;-)) There's a very simple rule with monotone: no part of the history goes away (branch certs aren't considered part of the history, they are just certs... markers if you will). Of course, as long as your revisions are only present in your own database, you can do whatever you want as long as you know what you're doing, but as soon as things get distributed, there's really no guaranteed way to lose any revision. Most projects that I know of simply adapt, and it's not even difficult. Cheers, Richard
