On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 1:40 PM, C. Michael Pilato <cmpilato_at_collab.net>
wrote:
> On 09/22/2014 12:13 PM, Julian Foad wrote:
> > Yup. So let's say we can agree to hide this behaviour at the repos
> layer. Then we face the decision of what to do with the FS layer:
> >
> > * make FS layer consistently version no-ops
> > -- a lot of work at FS layer
> > -- some work at repos layer
> >
> > * make FS layer consistently not version no-ops
> > -- some work at FS layer
> > -- no work at repos layer
> >
> > * leave FS layer as it is, partially implemented
> > -- no work at FS layer
> > -- some work at repos layer
> >
> > Which approach would you favour, and why?
>
> "make FS layer consistently not version no-ops" stands in opposition to
> the historical intent for the FS layer. The other two options are fine
> with me, though I confess that at this stage of the game, trying to
> retroactively consistify the FS layer's behavior without a driving
> use-case ...
Right. I've kind of lost the use-case this whole thread is suggesting we
"solve", and how the 14+ year behavior somehow interferes with that.
-g
Received on 2014-09-23 09:24:36 CEST