[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch with 'special files'

From: Robert Widhopf-Fenk
Subject: Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: arch with 'special files'
Date: Mon, 4 Apr 2005 02:03:56 +0200

On Friday, April 1, 2005 at 02:38:56, Josh England wrote:
> Robert Widhopf-Fenk wrote:
> > On Wednesday, March 30, 2005 at 12:19:39, address@hidden wrote:
> > 
> >>On Tue, Mar 29, 2005 at 11:39:04AM -0600, John Meinel wrote:
> >>
> >>>Josh England wrote:
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>>On Tue, 2005-03-29 at 11:01 +0200, Matthieu Moy wrote:
> >>
> >>[...]
> >>
> >>
> >>>>Of course.  However, I believe that full OS revision control is
> >>>>a legitimate need that Arch could be ideally suited for.
> >>>>
> >>>>I'm pretty sure all the changes I'd like can be handled with
> >>>>more (optional) metadata.  I'm not against some scripting glue,
> >>>>but to do this I still need to be able to store/retrieve some
> >>>>metadata in the archive.
> >>
> >>Heh. The metadata discussion again :-)
> >>
> >>
> >>>If you are asking for user-defined meta-data, how is this
> >>>different from creating a user-defined text file listing the
> >>>metadata that you are keeping track of [...]
> >>
> >>Well, it ain't different -- and it is. If Arch provides a
> >>standardized repository for (generic) file metadata, it's gently
> >>forcing applications to agree on one mechanism. 
> > 
> > 
> > And there would be no need to externally care for move and
> > remove of the metatdata along with a file (tla mv, tla rm),
> > which is a PITA unless you store the metadata within the
> > file.
> With generic metadata there will always need to be some amount of
> external care.

Sure, I am just asking for tla to handle it,
e.g. like svn does with properties.

> It seems like metadata could be conceptually broken up into two
> types. There is 'first-order' metadata, such as file permissions,
> for which arch is able to automatically apply the changes to archive
> files transparently during a get or update.  

There should be only one way to access and modify.

> A single 'second-order' metadata string would basically give
> infinite flexibility in terms of metadata.  

Why just a single one, because its easier to implement?

Well I might have been poisoned by subversion.  Actually, in
svn I do force some file to have the "correct" line ending
by svn:eol-style and for tla I would like to mark some files
where my tla-export performs keyword expansion.

The svn-book has a section on "Why properties?" and IMHO it
makes some sense ...

Cheers Robert

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]