[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: user-friendly hash formats, redux

From: Derek Scherger
Subject: Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: user-friendly hash formats, redux
Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:25:27 -0700
User-agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (X11/20041108)

graydon hoare wrote:
  - another local sequential system might involve keeping a sequence
    number for each author, sorted by date, such that the numbers go

      "derek-10", "graydon-12", "matt-72", "joel-13", "derek-11"

I was thinking about this approach the other day and I do like it. Two thoughts though:

        1. how do my commits get numbered if they're coming from
           different databases? this seems to require that I have
           a different key for each db that I might use, or else the
           numbers are not entirely stable, or something? hmm... now
           that I re-read your description above, so long as they have
           different dates they would get different numbers, but these
           numbers might be subject to change.

        2. being able to specify what came before or after derek-42
           would still seem to be quite useful as njs has pointed out.
           perhaps something like derek-42/-n and derek-42/+n or
           derek-42[-n] derek-42[+n] would be ok?

I'm willing to completely toss out the selector stuff we have now if nobody's using it. it's an experiment. I can accept failed experiments, and we know the command-line is in need of an overhaul anyways. here is a concrete proposal: what would happen if the command line accepted revisions in any of 3 forms:

   --hash   or -h  <id>                global hash identifier
   --seq    or -s  <author>-<seq>      local sequence numbers
   --rev    or -r  <x>.<y>.<z>...      local revision numbers

and we ask a hook for your preferences as far as which to print out (possibly all three) when listing logs, status, etc.

I think I like the --seq approach but I'm not sure I completely understand how --rev numbering would work. Being based on the "order things arrive" in my database makes me wonder if my numbers will be completely or subtley different from yours, making them not very helpful as a communication tool.

In doing the .restrictions branch I did wonder a few times whether we might end up with --id, --author, --date and also possibly something like --last n, --next n but the lack of association between these does seem rather messy.


reply via email to

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