Andy Allan wrote: > On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:30 PM, Brett Henderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >> Perhaps I completely misunderstood you. I was worried that you might do >> something like this: >> 1. way 12345 is currently at version 1. >> 2. Via potlatch you edit way 12345 adding a new tag and create version 2. >> 3a. Via potlatch you immediately add a second tag and update version 2 to >> include the extra tag. >> 3b. Via potlatch you immediately add a second tag and create version 3 >> including the extra tag. >> > > 3b. "In this situation a given changeset will increment the version > number of an object more than once." > http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/index.php/OSM_Protocol_Version_0.6#Version_numbers > Cool. I had a chat to Richard on IRC and he's also confirmed this. I was just nervous that Potlatch might be doing something funky that the main API doesn't allow. I should have more faith :-)
>> I'm happy with whatever label is applied, so long as I understand how it >> works :-) >> > > Bah, the labelling is the easy bit and potentially the only bit that > I'll be any good at :-) > :-) >> It might make more sense to discuss the changesets implementation. Here are >> several ways I could see them being implemented: >> > [...] > >> I suspect we're using scheme 3. >> > > From my understanding, that's correct. Individual modifications become > ACIDy, but changesets are a loose grouping of changes for labelling, > comments and so on. > Yep, okay. This all means that a replicated database (ie. osmosis replication, not true database replication) will not have a copy of the changeset information. Hopefully this won't be an issue. Cheers, Brett _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstreetmap.org/listinfo/dev
