Hello Tibor,

> Speaking of quilt, have you played with Mercurial Queues?  Sounds like
> a natural evolution of the quilt approach in the Mercurial world...

No, I haven't.  What I have noticed is that both Mercurial or Git have
the same funcionality as part of the standard package, at least the ones
I've installed from Debian Backports (Mercurial 0.9.5 and Git 1.4.4).

My crazy pet idea of the month (well, a couple of months) would be to
replace Invenio's digital object id (/record/123/files/abc.pdf) with the
hash of the object itself (either md5 or Git's sha1, like
/md5sum/860f52e524807a0373a8a8ab2fd6bd84 or
/sha1/e3f5b9260e96dccaa109a4176569ae8b00968493), and have the objects
themselves versioned (and/or replicated to a remote site for disaster
recovery and digital preservation) and being handled by gitweb or the
Mercurial equivalent.

But that conflicts with our (UAB) use of Invenio because we don't use
the standard (/record/123/files/) approach *because* some of our
collections have their fulltext restricted, so we go with a simple web
approach with two top-level directories (/pub or /uab) and let Apache
handle the permissions.

A variation of this idea would be to have this hash in a local Marc
subfield.  For implementing all those ideas, Git seems stronger.  For
a more traditional SCM approach, Mercurial seems easier.

And I haven't even look at bzr (http://lwn.net/Articles/272853/).  I'm
so puzzled!

Ferran

Reply via email to