Well, yes, it is just another sort of certificate. But you would need to change the monotone code in order to make proper use of it - for example, monotone ls revisions would want to output it; you'd want to be able to select by it. So you can't do it as the code stands. What I mean is, there would be no point in having a "nickname" certificate if it wasn't used in the monotone code.
Regarding uniqueness, I'm not bothered. I don't think nicknames need to be unique; but if you use them for selection, Monotone should detect nickname collisions and complain. If you want a guaranteed unique name for the revision, use the revision hash id, as now. The same applies to the "abbreviated revision ID" attack outlined above: you'd want to use the revision ID in your 'montone pull' to make sure you got the right one; but from then on you could use the nickname. _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
