On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 4:32 AM, Derric Atzrott <
[email protected]> wrote:

> >> Actually, the revision table allows for non-linear development (it
> >> stores from which version you edited the article). You could even
> >> make to "win" a version different than the one with the latest
> >> timestamp (by changing page_rev) one.
> >> You will need to change the way of viewing history, however, and add
> >> a system to keep track of "heads" and "merges".
> >> There may be some assumtions accross the codebase about the latest
> >> revision being the active one, too.
> >>
> > Cool!  That's a nice solution because it's transparent to the
> > end-user's system.  However, if we use the current schema as you're
> > describing, we would have to reconcile rev_id conflicts during the
> > merge.  This seems like a nasty problem if the merge is asynchronous,
> > for example a batched changeset sent in email.
> > -adam
>
> This is all a fantastic idea.  Distributing Wikipedia in a fashion similar
> to git will make it a lot easier to use in areas where Internet connections
> are not so common.
>
I have added this thread to
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:HaeB/Timeline_of_distributed_Wikipedia_proposals
 .

>
> I wonder could this sort of feature be implemented in the existing Kiwix
> codebase?  That would be ideal I think.
>
> Thank you,
> Derric Atzrott
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>



-- 
Tilman Bayer
Senior Operations Analyst (Movement Communications)
Wikimedia Foundation
IRC (Freenode): HaeB
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to