On Fri, Nov 4, 2011 at 12:52 PM, Zeev Pekar <[email protected]> wrote:
> ** > > Ok, maybe implement "partial clones"? > > If you have a partial clone, fossil could not guaranty semantic consistency, could not accurately follow timeline information, etc. Any file in subdir a/b/c could refer to another file in subtree d/e/f, If you then restrict access to d/e/f, then any partial clone is useless because the parts we have access to (d/e/f) require parts which we do not have (a/b/c). A partial history is useless - i cannot imagine how fossil could possibly function with a partial history, If it was asked to show the history for artifact abcdabcd and it cannot find it in a partial clone then fossil cannot know if the artifact does not exist at all or if it exists in a restricted subdir. And those are just the points which immediately come to mind. Those more familiar with the internal structures will certainly also see cases which such a feature would break. The size of the can of worms such a feature would open is... well, it's really darned big. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
