Karl Fogel <kfogel@galois.collab.net> writes:
>
> One point (I'm not sure if this is helpful):
>
> If /main/foo.c and its branch /jimb-branch/foo.c refer to the same
> node (3.14), and someone sets a different ACL on one of them, then --
> assuming ACLs are implemented as properties -- that means the two can
> no longer share the same node revision. But, their non-property
> content is still the same, and so that could be shared, or be
> expressed with a null text diff, which is very nearly the same as
> being directly shared. (And the difference between the property lists
> would probably still be small, too).
>
> So when a branch starts having different ACLs than its ancestor line,
> some sharing is lost, but not the most important sharing (that of file
> contents). Maybe implementing ACLs as properties isn't such a bad
> idea after all, then?
Don't you want to be able to change the access allowed to old
revisions?
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:17 2006