[Monotone-devel] Re: Policy user model

[Timothy Brownawell]

On Sun, 2007-01-21 at 13:28 -0600, Timothy Brownawell wrote:

> How to get it
> ---------------
> 
> (1) requires that a statement carry a list of earlier statements on the
> same (subject, action) pair. This can be used to build a DAG, which we
> can run a merge algorithm on in the case of multiple heads to give (3)
> and (3b). (2) can be handled by making statements have one of
> {"conditions = Y", "conditions += Y", "conditions -= Y"}, and making the
> merger sufficiently intelligent to understand these.

> I rather suspect that we would need a set merger (as opposed to the
> scalar merger that is *-merge) to be able to fully provide (2). (Unless
> we drop the "specify exact conditions" possibility, in which case
> *-merge would work fine.)

...It's not even that good, actually. Because we probably want to be
able to give arbitrarily complex boolean expressions in the condition.
At least the basic boolean operators are commutative/associative, so
keeping things in order doesn't matter, so we can fairly trivially build
something from *-merge.

-- 
Timothy

Free (experimental) public monotone hosting: http://mtn-host.prjek.net