-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Sidney Markowitz writes: > Justin Mason wrote: > > I dunno -- that seems pretty scary. Also, it doesn't fix the problem > > where you have a meta rule in the change which relies on a predicate > > from a previous change, at all. > > I meant that instead of attaching rules they attach pathname/revision# > pairs, not a single revision number for the whole group. But I agree that > seems scary. Also, it makes a mess of the svn repository if it can't be all > checked out and used as a whole. > > Dealing with metarules and modifications to them presents a problem in any > case. How do we deal with person X submitting a modification to metarule A > and proposed rule A1, while person Y submits a different modification to > metarule A and proposed rule A2 while person Z submits proposed rule A3 that > relies on the existing version of metarule A? well, good question. SARE guys? - --j. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Exmh CVS iD8DBQFC3suMMJF5cimLx9ARApe3AKCnb95qszQ4kykGLThg0O3to2PxggCeJquu HlbkspFIIcJLynwV7vwsVqY= =OOMT -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
