Ludovic> I'm not familiar with the `tla' code base but I think it'd
  Ludovic> be quite insightful if you could explain how according to you
  Ludovic> such a new storage model could be plugged in GNU Arch, 
  Ludovic> technically.

There are deep and shallow parts.

At the deep part, there's a need to add Arch's inventory and merging
tools to the revc framework.   At the shallow part, there's convenience
command, front-end, and ancillary tool work to do.

As an option, user's should be able to drive revc's manifest from
Arch's inventory system.  I personally go back and forth a bit on
how much it is or isn't worth simultaneously tweaking inventory
a bit (e.g., dropping some categories, adding a single-file mapping
of file->id mappings, biting the bullet on one more change to how
implicit (embedded in the file) taglines are found).

The merge tools are all built out of mkpatch/dopatch which is
layered on the inventory system.  It would be worth floating these
as independent tools and making them able to operate on trees
within a revc archive (without having to check-out those trees).

At a slightly higher level, the merge tools need to update revcs
compact record of history.

The higher level merge tools should use revcs history record rather
than searching patch-logs.   It's ok if they still provide for 
maintaining patch logs (desirable, as an option) but to do ancestor
computations they should just use revc's records.

At the shallow end: the revc code so far is ready-to-bind to your
favorite scripting languages, either using a linked-in or a 
subprocess model.  Presumably some users will want a subset of the
CLI to be compatible, so, do that.

There's lots of details within all of that but a finite number,
none of which is very hard.

-t




_______________________________________________
Gnu-arch-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users

GNU arch home page:
http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/

Reply via email to