Re: [Monotone-devel] Branches in git and monotone

[Markus Schiltknecht]

Hi,

Julio M. Merino Vidal wrote:
> git's approach seems simpler and, at the same time, more flexible.

Well, git simply doesn't want to fiddle with that issue. In a way, there 
are no (shared) branches in git.

> What I'm wondering is... can monotone's approach represent some 
> situation that git cannot?

Hm. Good question. I guess it's a matter of taste, if you want the VCS 
to provide shared branch names or if you are fine with relying on 
everybody naming his local branches the same as you do.

For example, in mtn, we can say: the head(s) of branch n.v.m. In git, 
you would have to pass around revids, to be sure. Although, in both 
cases, you have to make sure you are up to date. Otherwise, you'd have 
to specify the peer, which currently holds the revision you are talking 
about. I.e. the head of branch n.v.m on venge.net. But as soon as you 
are referring to a certain peer, you could as well use those peer's 
local branch names, as git does.

So, yes, I agree that currently, we don't gain that much by the 
distributed branch names.

> PS: I don't know what the "policy branches" (or whatever they are 
> called) will change in this area.  Maybe everything (making it more 
> git-like), and then my question is pointless now ;-)

Well, certainly policy branches should give us the possibility to rename 
our branches. Or mark them as 'dead'. Maybe allow fine grained access 
control to specific branches. Or even help in case one needs to revoking 
a revision due to license or patent violations or some such.

These are all things that go beyond what git does - and need shared 
branch names. Think of the shared branch names as a layer above all the 
git-like stuff. You don't even *have* to use it in monotone, you can 
very well talk about revision hashes to identify 'branches'.

Monotone even has the concept of a project, which groups together 
multiple branches. That's still almost unused, but policy branches will 
most probably be something that is defined per project, i.e. who may 
start 'official' branches for a project.

Regards

Markus