Re: atomic revprop commits at the RA level

Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> In IRC and email, I know that cmpilato was really opposed to adding a
> new 'metadata' function to the editor API. I say metadata, because
> the editor is supposed to be about "how to change a versioned tree',
> and not about information surrounding the tree itself. Revprops are
> metadata. One could also argue that editor->set_target_revision() is
> also metadata about the tree, and should never have been put in.

I was opposed, yes. I got over it.

> I know one interesting idea that floated by (in IRC) was to create a
> *new* vtable. This vtable would contain metadata funcs, and also an
> editor...

This is why I got over it. I started to propose this very thing last week,
but when I realized just how awful it was, I folded.

That's why I proposed 'editor->change_edit_prop()'. It wasn't really that I
was opposed to the editor carrying metadata about the edit, it was that
editors shouldn't know anything about txns as revisions-in-progress (though
I might not have expressed that well). But as long as we talk about "edit
metadata" (which *we* know is a mechanism that can be used for, among other
things, carrying txn props), it doesn't rub me quite as wrongly.

-- 
C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato@collab.net>
CollabNet   <>   www.collab.net   <>   Distributed Development On Demand