On Thu, 2015-07-09 at 11:36 +0200, Michael Dürig wrote: > > On 9.7.15 9:05 , Marcel Reutegger wrote: > > in short, the mounted trees must be entirely self contained. > > ... or have a consensus about shared stuff. This is probably the way > to > go for node types as self contained doesn't work here. > > Overall these are the same constraints as what we came up with when > we > discussed multiplexing on top of the node store API. Is there a way > we > can enforce such restrictions? The last thing we want is to rely on > the > client to adhere to them or risk a repository corruption otherwise.
We should and probably can. The question is where to place those constraints. Ideally, at the higher level we should not be aware of the constraints of the lower layers. At the lower layers we have no clue about the high-level concepts. In the end we will probably enforce the restrictions at the higher levels, although I'm curious if a better solution exists. Robert
