Hi Dale, On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 10:52 AM, Dale Henrichs < dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com> wrote:
> Eliot, > > If we remove the meta data from the FileTree repo, then it will be > necessary to use the `adopt` command to restore the proper version history > before interchanging copying to an mcz repo or trying to merge with an mcz > package ... > > `adopt` is not an ideal solution, which is exactly why I've (stubbornly) > maintained the monticello meta data ... > So *please* continue to be stubborn :-) My statement about "as the community begins to use git-based repos as their > primary repository" includes a broad definition of community, in my mind:) > +1 Cross-platform package portability has always been one of my primary > concerns and I do share your concern that it's a big step to remove the > monticello meta data from FileTree (again it's why I haven't done so yet) > ... > > So far this is a bridge that doesn't need to be crossed, but when it > becomes time to cross it, there might be other options that can be applied > (perhaps an ancestry can be synthesized from the git meta data?) > Which would be reasonable, but it needs to be there. And thanks. Dale > > > > > On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Eliot Miranda <eliot.mira...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi Dale, >> >> On Nov 30, 2014, at 8:14 AM, Dale Henrichs < >> dale.henri...@gemtalksystems.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sun, Nov 30, 2014 at 7:51 AM, kilon alios <kilon.al...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> So far all I knew that using git for binary files was a no go, doable >>> but not recommended. Thus I found strange that filetree uses binary files. >>> >>> >> Well the files are text files, but because the text represents structured >> data, the line-based auto-merge used by git is not correct ... >> >> The monticello version files have been included in FileTree to make it >> possible to move the packages seamlessly between Filetree-based >> repositories and mcz based repositories ... without that meta data, once >> you move a package to FileTree it could not be moved back into an mcz >> repository without losing all of the package history. >> >> When I was first introducing FileTree, I thought it was important that >> folks be able to test out the git waters without making an "irreversible >> commitment to git." Even today I find myself needing to move packages back >> and forth between git and mcz repositories, so Thierry's merge-tools has >> made it possible for me to have my cake and eat it too. >> >> I have been threatening to remove the monticello meta data from FileTree >> (or at least make it optional), but I just haven't had the time or >> motivation to do so ... again Thierry's merge-tool means that I never have >> to deal with a manual merge of the version file, so for me I never have to >> think about it ... >> >> As the tool sets for supporting git improve and as the community begins >> to use git-based repos as their primary repository, it will make sense to >> remove the monticello meta data from FileTree ... >> >> >> Will that mean that packages will still be able to be interchanged with >> Monticello? If yes, will that mean that packages will still be able to >> be merged with Monticello? >> >> Dale >> >> > -- best, Eliot
