Patrick, OT and version control systems serve very different masters. By that I mean you wouldn't want to use the merge system of version control systems for Wave, just as you would not want to use OT for managing source code history.
The reason is simple, to steal a line from one of the Wave team, OT is too good. OT's merge never fails. In version control systems you, as a user, rely on the merge failing to highlight areas that need human intervention. In wave we don't want humans to have to constantly be involved in handling the real time merge of the disparate change streams. brett On Sat, Aug 7, 2010 at 2:51 PM, Patrick Nagel <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Ian, > > On 2010-08-06 15:55 UTC Ian Roughley wrote: > > I've yet to see a CVS that pushes the updates out to users, especially > down > > a graphed network of servers, the premises is always that you go and pull > > what you want - I see this as the main difference. > > What I meant is, those modern VCS have solved all problems around > efficiently > branching and merging "any type of content". Of course there would be some > additions needed, such as "subscribing". > > Patrick. > > -- > Key ID: 0x86E346D4 http://patrick-nagel.net/key.asc > Fingerprint: 7745 E1BE FA8B FBAD 76AB 2BFC C981 E686 86E3 46D4 > -- Brett Morgan http://www.google.com/profiles/brett.morgan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Wave Protocol" 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/wave-protocol?hl=en.
