Hey Chris, On 2011-09-21, at 5:15 PM, Christopher Armstrong wrote:
> Hi Eric > > I'm currently working on the same thing :-) > > I've been modifying CoreObject to support this type of model (persistent > "commit" tracks) so that you can branch and undo the branch. Oh, that's cool. :-) I'd be interested in seeing how you approached it. > Unfortunately, it breaks COHistoryTrack, and I've been pulling my hair > out trying to get it to support both. I obviously haven't committed it > yet. I don't think it's too important if it's broken, because COHistoryTrack was a hackish attempt to get the behaviour I wanted in TestHistoryTrack.m. The test is more interesting, because it tries to test revision control on a somewhat realistic composite document scenario, and nested repositories are the only way I've come up with to get sensible behaviour in that test. (Not saying that the general idea of building a filtered history graph isn't useful :-) Eric > Quentin - can I break COHistoryTrack? Maybe in another branch for now? > > Regards > Chris > > On Wednesday, September 21, 2011 2:42 PM, "Eric Wasylishen" > <ewasylis...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hey, >> I'm trying to sketch out some simple model objects which will implement >> the nested versioning scheme I mentioned earlier. I put it on my github >> page: https://github.com/ericwa/NestedVersioning >> Cheers, >> Eric >> _______________________________________________ >> Etoile-dev mailing list >> Etoile-dev@gna.org >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev >> > -- > Christopher Armstrong > carmstrong ^^AT^ fastmail dOT com /Dot/ au > > > _______________________________________________ > Etoile-dev mailing list > Etoile-dev@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev _______________________________________________ Etoile-dev mailing list Etoile-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/etoile-dev
