Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: Re: give us a hand with arch

[Ethan Benson]

On Sun, Sep 28, 2003 at 07:20:41PM +0200, Pau Aliagas wrote:
> 
> That's fine, but some of us don't. tagline let's you use both at the same 
> time. Choosing it now is better for you as there is no easy way of 
> migrating one project from one naming mehod to the other by now.
> You can act as if explicit was the method, just pretend it's so.

this is not necessarily a good idea.

the owner/maintainer of an archive gets to decide administrative
things like tagging-method and such, if this person does not want
taglines, for WHATEVER reason, thats his decision and he should
enforce it with tagging-method=explicit

otherwise your going to get people submitting patches with taglines
the maintainer will then refuse.

I also am starting to see the start of another issue with taglines,
with taglines the user is generating the tag, rather then tla.  as we
have seen on the list there is branching opinions on the `better' way
to generate taglines, some say uuidgen, some say a description of the
file's purpose is better, some say email address, etc etc.

I suspect that tagline maintained trees are going to end up having the
problem of the maintainer wanting a certain format tagline (say uuid)
and patch submitters trying to submit patches using some other method
(email address, description) and the maintainer will refuse the patch
because of it.  maybe this can be solved by stating in CodingStyle
what format tagline is acceptable..  

with explicit there is no arguments, tla decides what the tag looks
like.

> > The day we'll have multiple channels in the inode, or a way to bind two
> > files together, we won't need to call move-tag and friends anymore, and
> > still it will be the explicit mode, never the tagline.
> 
> When this happens (I want to see the working code), maybe it will be
> easier to edit file forks (or xattrs); meanwhile adding a tagline is far
> mor convenient. Or tla add/move etc in your case.

you can see working kernel code today, either with a 2.4-xfs kernel,
or a 2.6 kernel (with xfs, ext2, or ext3, perhaps others).

but as stated most userland is unaware of xattrs, so there are
numerous ways they can be destroyed unintentionally, for the simple
case unpatched mv(1) works fine, so long as the src and dest are on
the same filesystem.

-- 
Ethan Benson
http://www.alaska.net/~erbenson/

pgpRcrWdP9iTb.pgp
Description: PGP signature