|
From: | Derek Scherger |
Subject: | Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: Future of monotone |
Date: | Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:51:03 -0700 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (X11/20071116) |
Thomas Keller wrote:
Does it really make sense to have an author field for anything beside a commit cert? If you tag or test something, you do not become the author of anything, you just mark something somehow. When I look at the proposed database table schemes so far I somehow have the impression that we rather have a hard time of applying the same metadata which fit perfectly for non-commit certs on commit certificates - i.e. tag, branch, suspend and testresult perfectly fit into the (name,value,comment?,date,signer,signature) tuple scheme, just commit certs do not because they can optionally have an author which is different from the signer.
One reason for separating out the author from the signer is that, in the event of a database rebuild, all certs will be re-signed by whoever does the rebuild and the original author is lost. This has happened a few times in the monotone history and while not a huge problem does leave rebuild a little more lossy than it could be.
Cheers, Derek
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |