> As a policy *tool* I'm very much in favour of a namespace that knows
> about people and projects and branches and ... whatnot. However the
> management of revision identity and the namespace should not be coupled
They should be coupled differently, is all.
A good convention for naming commits seems to be:
<user-name>/<checksum>
where the `<user-name>' is nearly anything a client cares to pick and
`<checksum>' is a contents-summary of the resulting revision. This
both generalizes the requirements on and simplifies the implementation
of the revision-builder part of the system.
Arch 1.x is bogus by too narrowly constraining `<user-name>' and
omitting `<checksum>' altogether -- but that's easily remedied.
Of course, by one mechanism or another, clients must be able to
compute a list of the names of the ancestors of a given commit from
the commit itself. This returns to the familiar question of whether
and how to support some sort of archive-side ancestry-list caching.
-t
_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/
