Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone

Robert Anderson
2003-03-15T21:25:41Z

On Sat, 2003-03-15 at 13:25, Daniel Phillips wrote:
> On Sat 15 Mar 03 17:21, Horst von Brand wrote:
> > Daniel Phillips <phillips@arcor.de> said:
> > > On Thu 13 Mar 03 01:52, Horst von Brand wrote:
> >
> > [...]
> >
> > > > I don't think so. As the user sees it, a directory is mostly a
> > > > convenient labeled container for files. You think in terms of moving
> > > > files around, not destroying one and magically creating an exact copy
> > > > elsewhere (even if mv(1) does exactly this in some cases). Also, this
> > > > breaks up the operation "mv foo bar/baz" into _two_ changes, and this
> > > > is wrong as the file loses its revision history.
> > >
> > > No, that's a single change to one directory object.
> >
> > mv some/where/foo bar/baz
> >
> > How is that _one_ change to _one_ directory object?
>
> Oops, sorry, I didn't read your bar/baz correctly. Yes, it's two directory
> objects, but it's only one file object, and the history (not including the
> name changes) is attached to the file object, not the directory object. This
> is implemented via an object id for each file object, something like an inode
> number.
>
> > > > > ...then this part gets much easier.
> > > >
> > > > ... by screwing it up. This is exactly one of the problems noted for
> > > > CVS.
> > >
> > > CVS doesn't have directory objects.
> >
> > And it doesn't keep history across moves, as the only way it knows to move
> > a file is destroying the original and creating a fresh copy.
>
> Ah, but it does. Sorry for not explaining the object id thing earlier.
>
> > > Does anybody have a convenient mailing list for this design discussion?
> >
> > Good idea to move this off LKML
>
> Yup, but nobody has offered one yet, so...

I think the arch-users@lists.fifthvision.net list would be happy to host
continuing discussion in this vein. Considering Larry's repeated
attempts to get people to look at arch as a "better fit," it seems
particularly appropriate.

Of course, you'd have to tolerate "arch community" views on a lot of
these issues, but I suspect that might help focus the discussion.

Bob