Eric S. Raymond wrote:
>Greg Hudson <ghudson@MIT.EDU>:
>
>
>>On Tue, 2004-10-05 at 01:13, Rob Weir wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Eric, how do you plan to implement a distributed version control without
>>>file-ids[0]? Or do you think every repository should have all it's
>>>history, ala BK?
>>>
>>>
>>>[0]: this was more or less the point of the discussions on the changeset
>>>list last year.
>>>
>>>
>>Yeah, and I expect we'll hit the same dead end; we're not currently
>>prepared to reconceptualize Subversion in arch terms in order to have
>>arch-style distributed version control.
>>
>>
>
>Sorry, I missed the earlier messages in this thread because of the
>subject. I gather the "Eric" that question is addressed to is me.
>
>The answer is yes, I think every repository should have all its
>history, ala BK. I think file-IDs in the arch sense are a mistake.
>Rather, I am imagining a system in which the basic primitives
>are diff and merge *on change histories* rather than on working
>copy files.
>
>
Doesn't that make it impossible to keep parts of a replicated repository
hidden (for security reasons)?
>(The conceptual resemblance to BK is not an accident; I had some influence on
>Larry McVoy's thinking back in 1998.)
>
>
I'll only note that, as far as I can see, BK has no notion of path-based
security.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 7 00:55:20 2004