Thomas Haas <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: [...]
> Due to the distributed nature and local scope of incremental > revision numbers in monotone, the semantic would be ordering of > commit, sync, and pull operations in time. I believe this semantic > would also be intuitive and very easy to understand. That would work provided all the relevant machines had sufficiently synchronised clocks. And provided no two revisions occurred during the same second (or whatever time interval you chose). Neither assumption fills me with confidence; probably more relevantly, monotone deliberatly avoids making similar assumptions about time, so I doubt the developers would go for this. _______________________________________________ Monotone-devel mailing list Monotone-devel@nongnu.org http://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/monotone-devel
