Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: OpenEmbedded looking to jump ship

[William Uther]

On 05/05/2008, at 4:52 PM, Koen Kooi wrote:

> Justin Patrin wrote:
> > On Sun, May 4, 2008 at 5:29 PM, William Uther
> > <address@hidden>  wrote:
> > >  (Aside: was the recent problem OE had with suspend because suspend
> > >  itself didn't work, or rather because people were using older  
> > > versions
> > >  of monotone that didn't respect suspend certs?)
> >
> > The OE developers set up a server which automatically merges multiple
> > heads. The server had an old version of monotone, pre-suspend, so it
> > would merge the suspended head to the non-suspended head.
>
> No, the server always has a recent mtn (mtn-0.39 at the time). A  
> developer pushed 200 bogus revs (from a vendor that didnt want to  
> use branches and thus committed straight to org.oe.dev and an  
> employee that pushed to the OE server from his vendor DB), which got  
> suspended, but antother developer with an old mtn merged them, since  
> that mtn didn't know about suspend certs.

So the 'problem' was that we had too much 'backward compatibility'  
where suspend certs are concerned.  i.e. it was possible to use an  
older version of monotone to break things.

This is a tricky problem to solve.  It would have been a bad thing™ to  
force everyone to upgrade their mtn when we introduced suspend certs -  
not everyone uses them.

Will         :-}