Hi, I'm taking a look at the current revision approval possibilities, and there are things I don't quite understand. Also, it looks like this hasn't been looked at for ages.
First of all, we probably need to rewrite the example for the get_revision_cert_trust, as it currently uses the "ancestor" cert, which hasn't existed since versoin 0.15 (when we switched to changesets). Second, the approve command adds a branch cert, and I would like for someone to explain the rationale behind that. I assume that the branch name is meant to express a little more exactly what is being approved, could that be correct? It seems to me that setting an explicit branch might even be a bit dangerous. If I decided to approve monotone with a special branch, for example net.venge.monotone.approved.linux, it would mean that we end up with a branch that seems to have multiple heads or something like that. It would be a very disconnect graph at the very least. It would be interesting to know how many are actually using these two features. Does anyone use the approve command? Does anyone use the get_revision_cert_trust hook? If there was a change in those, would anyone get hurt? I've a proposal: 1. change the approve command to add a "approved" cert rather than a "branch" one. Other than that, it works exactly the same way as before. 2. rewrite the example for the get_revision_cert_trust to look at a "approved" cert. Comments? Cheers, Richard ----- Please consider sponsoring my work on free software. See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details. -- Richard Levitte [EMAIL PROTECTED] OpenSSL Project http://www.openssl.org/~levitte/ _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel