On Thu, 2006-01-12 at 15:05 -0500, Yoanis Gil Delgado wrote: > On Thursday 12 January 2006 02:34 pm, you wrote: > > On Thursday 12 January 2006 01:44 am, you wrote: > > > Hans Reiser wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > I am skeptical that having it occur with every > > > >write is desirable actually. > > > > > > > > > > Consider the case where you type cat file1 >> file2. This will produce > > > a version of file2 for every 4k that is in file1, because (well I didn't > > > look at the bash source, but I would guess) it appends in 4k incremental > > > writes rather than one big write. Versioning on file close makes more > > > sense, but I suggest manual control using the ..../checkin pseudofile, > > > and then we can reasonably make it the default plugin for the whole FS > > > (write it so that it calls the other plugins so that when we change the > > > other plugins we don't need to change your code to do it). People who > > > don't want versioning will simply never touch the checkin pseudofile. > > > Make sure that for that case there is just an if statement condition > > > check as overhead, and there will be no reason to not make versioning > > > the default plugin that happens to do nothing unless you use the checkin > > > pseudofile at least once during the life of the file. > > > > > > hmm, maybe ..../snap is better than ..../checkin ? Well, let's decide > > > that once the code is written....;-) > > > > > > Do you agree with my points here? > > > Yes I agree with your points. Still, i will like that some files have auto > versioning.
Would you be able to enable auto versioning for an entire directory, including all new files created in it? For instance I would like to enable auto versioning on the /etc/ directory, so I can always track changes to config files. Also I assume it will track which UID makes the change? -- Mike Benoit <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
