[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files
From: |
Thomas Haas |
Subject: |
Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files |
Date: |
Mon, 12 Sep 2005 22:00:12 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0 (Windows/20041206) |
Bruce Stephens wrote:
> Thomas Haas <address@hidden> writes:
>
> [...]
>
>
>>Actually. you and Nathaniel are right: the certificates I would like
>>to use make a statement about a specific revision of a file. As
>>there is no notion of a revision of a file (only revision of a
>>tree), it does not seem right to me to use the existing certificates
>>for my purpose -- although technically possible.
>
>
> Yes, you just get revisions of a tree, and blobs of data, and each
> revision has a manifest, and each manifest maps a filename to a blob
> of data.
>
> So that doesn't really let you talk about a version of a file without
> giving a revision of a tree as well.
>
> But I'd have though that's OK: almost all of the cases I can think of
> for commenting on a file would be in the context of the rest of the
> tree anyway. For example, that README has been checked, and is
> suitable for the release. For that kind of case, I can imagine you'd
> want some shortcuts, so you could fix INSTALL, but keep README as
> being approved, but you could have scripts and things to do that.
It is a semantical thing to me. I understand that certificates in
monotone today make a statement about a certain state (=revision) of the
whole tree. Monotone does not have a notion of a statement about a
subset of a tree. (Note: this is not a critic towards monotone, just a
fact.)
OF course, one can add to the statement, that actually the statement
only concerns a subset of the tree (ie a file or set of files) and not
the whole tree. While technical possible, I consider it a hack, because
monotone itself or related tools will never understand and support this
statements. Hence, no point in using certs for this purpose (for me).
Thanks
- tom
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Certificates for files, (continued)
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Certificates for files, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/09/08
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Certificates for files, Thomas Haas, 2005/09/09
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/09
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Thomas Haas, 2005/09/09
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/09
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/09/09
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Thomas Haas, 2005/09/12
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Jon Bright, 2005/09/12
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/12
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files,
Thomas Haas <=
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/09/13
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Thomas Haas, 2005/09/13
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Daniel Vogelheim, 2005/09/13
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/13
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Daniel Vogelheim, 2005/09/14
- [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Bruce Stephens, 2005/09/14
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/09/14
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Daniel Vogelheim, 2005/09/13
- Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Certificates for files, Nathaniel Smith, 2005/09/13