[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] partial pull #3 - calling conventions
From: |
Thomas Keller |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] partial pull #3 - calling conventions |
Date: |
Fri, 25 May 2007 13:57:18 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Thunderbird 2.0.0.0 (X11/20070326) |
Markus Schiltknecht schrieb:
The thing is, knowing these revision id's does not really solve the
problem. If we allow the automate commands to spit out all the rev ids
within a gap, it still outputs revision ids which are not in the
repository.
The question is: Do we care if automate commands spit out those revision
ids or not? Shouldn't this be up to the user / client since he knows
best what to do with such a revision id?
We could also add an option "--no-sentinal-revs" to most of these
commands to be able to filter them out quickly in case we're not
interested in a complete graph without gaps.
A 'mtn automate get_revision $REVID' on such a rev id will fail.
>
Except
you are going into a completely different direction: adding another
revision format, which could include these gaps. Then 'mtn automate
get_revision $REVID' would for example show:
format_version "2"
type "sentinel"
new_manifest [74c1f552e0b36503edd20164a8c6cc8601010470]
height_covered "206"
revision_sentineled [0010f6d6eb621cf5eea7b73676c17295ed6961cd]
revision_sentineled [001371a4c101b5064480ccf32cdb16563c9ba6a9]
revision_sentineled [0018767555f7e2d2fe8d3b50ff3ad2a54f6d4783]
revision_sentineled [0031892be77daf402965c25394423fe54e499d1a]
revision_sentineled [003687b087a1f4358d2caa795645b45cb6cf3d1e]
revision_sentineled [005684f8690d9c68d4177fcd73baec282ce69da4]
old_revision [3c3ae55c27f65ea303e1d173ab1f2f29756c6571]
patch "po/es.po"
from [e17da89bc930cbce44e2df811099abe83f2481b9]
to [a9c75b19107f35c8aef74870873c03b88289f6f2]
.
.
.
Thinking a bit more on this I tend to say that its completly impractical
to introduce another revision format. At first I assumed that something like
format_version "1"
new_manifest []
old_revision [0010f6d6eb621cf5eea7b73676c17295ed6961cd]
would be enough to define a sentinel revision (the empty new_manifest
stanza could be used as flag), but then I realized that two sentinal
childs of one and the same revision would lead to the same pseudo
revision and therefor couldn't be distinguished textually. But your
approach (obviously I don't understand why you list all these
revision_sentineled stanzas) doesn't seem to be better for another reason:
We always assume that a revision_id is the sha1 hash of the revision
text behind it. If we now introduce a "pseudo format" for a gap revision
we'd effectively have to change the revision_id of that revision so the
revision is valid after all and therefor also have to change all
descendant revisions as well, _each time_ we pull a bit more history. I
don't think this is practical. What could a gap revision text tell us
after all if we don't want to pull the revision's text beforehand as
well? We just have the history relations, and that's all. To get this
info, people could just call automate
parents|children|graph|ancestors|descendents.
So, in the end I'm for just issueing an error if get_revision is called
for a gap revision.
Thomas.
--
ICQ: 85945241 | SIP: 1-747-027-0392 | http://www.thomaskeller.biz
> Guitone, a frontend for monotone: http://guitone.thomaskeller.biz
> Music lyrics and more: http://musicmademe.com
- [Monotone-devel] partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Markus Schiltknecht, 2007/05/25
- Re: [Monotone-devel] partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Thomas Keller, 2007/05/25
- Re: [Monotone-devel] partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Christian Ohler, 2007/05/26
- [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Lapo Luchini, 2007/05/26
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Christian Ohler, 2007/05/26
- [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Lapo Luchini, 2007/05/26
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Matt Johnston, 2007/05/27
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Markus Schiltknecht, 2007/05/28
- [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Lapo Luchini, 2007/05/28
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: partial pull #3 - calling conventions, Markus Schiltknecht, 2007/05/29