Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: linus talk on git

[Thomas Moschny]

On Wednesday 23 May 2007, Richard Levitte wrote:
> In message <address@hidden> on Wed, 23 May 2007 09:51:03
> +1000, Brian May <address@hidden> said:
>
> bam> >>>>> "Bruce" == Bruce Stephens <address@hidden>
> writes: bam>
> bam>     Bruce> Probably more of a win to have a combined
> bam>     Bruce> date+author+branch+changelog kind of cert thing (since
> bam>     Bruce> that's what you want on almost all revisions) such as has
> bam>     Bruce> been suggested before.
> bam>
> bam> That would be good.
>
> Actually, I'm not so sure about that.  A revision can belong to more
> than one branch (there are a number of those in the monotone
> history).  There are also cases where a revision has multiple authors
> and dates (typically, those are merges performed by more than one).

But currently, if there are multiple certs, we cannot tell which commit 
message or date (or branch, seldomly) belongs to whom (author-wise), and vice 
versa.

Having combined certs would solve that problem at the cost of sometimes 
storing the same information twice: e.g. when two people do the same merge, 
there will be two certs with different dates/authors, but identical branch 
names and commit messages. But that's reasonable anyway.

Thomas

pgpzJ7aX_c3sA.pgp
Description: PGP signature