On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 9:22 AM, Edward K. Ream <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I can't help feeling, despite all the work and all the proofs to the >> contrary, that someday, somehow, sentinels are going to go away. It will be >> the result of a major expansion of point of view. Something like c.db or >> c.zodb. > > Let's imagine the impossible for awhile. > > Let's pretend that we don't know what a .leo file is. > > Let's pretend that we don't know what an external file is (a file > derived from an @<file> node). > > Let's pretend we don't know what a clone is. > > Let's pretend that we don't know what bzr can do, or rather, let's > pretend that bzr can do anything we want :-) > > Let's pretend that we can *compute* sentinels by magic.
What is the definition of 'sentinel' ? ... "markup which tells Leo how to place text into nodes" ? > > The great thing about creativity, and the creative unconscious, is > that it loves to be teased. It delights in the impossible, the > paradoxical, the illogical. It *loves* confusion, the mess, the not > knowing. > > The great thing about thought experiments is that the impossible is, > by definition, possible. > > The great thing about Leo's community is that contains brilliant > designers. People who are not afraid of change, who are not satisfied > with what we have, even if what we have is Leo :-) Some of these > brilliant designers are great programmers, some can barely write a > Python script. No matter. All can confront what is not yet in > existence. > > Given this base, what can we say? > > Well, if we are to "get rid" of sentinels, then we must compute them. > This requires magic. > > Suppose we "compute" sentinels (or any other needed data) by asking a > demon (like Maxwell's demon) for help. > > Suppose the demon's task is quite simple: it just looks it up in > leoDB. > > Suppose it's not possible to commit anything to bzr without (in > effect), committing leoDB. This is magic, but who cares? > > Suppose no derived file contains any sentinels, except one, at the > very start of the file. Something like: > > #...@leo-db:unique-id-and-timestamp Could this be eliminated? each external has a unique path which bzr knows about. If not, it would be akin to the vim 'modelines' comment one sometimes sees. > > Suppose bzr magically handles conflicting updates to local db's. > Alternatively, suppose bzr handles a single, worldwide, leo db. > > Suppose that we truly don't know what a .leo file is, but whatever it > is, it allows us to read derived files, and it provides the outline > view we know and love. > > Suppose that reading a .leo files computes the data that is presently > contained in sentinels, using the version of the leo db implied by the > single #...@leo-db sentinel in each derived file. > > Wouldn't this work? You are looking at Leo using a db backend, combining that with bzr capability, seeing potential for having and eating the cake? Let's go all out and program to Zope3's interfaces, create adapters to connect things together: Leo codebase, db backends, bzr (or git or hg) for managing state ... > > Edward > > > > --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
