|
From: | Graydon Hoare |
Subject: | [Monotone-devel] Re: Future of monotone |
Date: | Tue, 29 Jan 2008 11:01:46 -0800 |
User-agent: | Thunderbird 2.0.0.9 (Windows/20071031) |
Thomas Moschny wrote:
On Monday 28 January 2008, Graydon Hoare wrote:I think it's a good branch as they go in this sort of thing. I just ran out of interest.Sorry to hear that, but that's life, it seems.It contains a variety of interrelated new code. Anyone else is welcome to pick it up of course.The changes are, primarily: [...] - a sketch of the long-planned upgrade to certificatesCan you explain that a bit? Is this related to the idea of creating combined certs consisting of a author/date/msg/branch tuple?
Yes, though there was a huge following thread in which most of the issues were probed by others here :)
Pretty much my reasoning was: - We need a new sort of 'branch' cert that points to a symbolic branch ID rather than a string branch name. - The 'branch' cert is really a 'commit' or 'approve' cert, so we might as well gain some semantic clarity and cut down the amount of crypto overhead (signatures are not small) by bundling the commit/approve date, author(s), and comment fields. Of course these would be separate from signing key ID and signing date. Authors don't even need to be formally identified by keys. They can be strings. - It'd be good to shove a version number and/or algorithm ID in there for vague hand-wavey future proofing. Not that one can ever be safe from the future.Perhaps this is embarrassing, but I thought 'suspend' certs had to do with shutting down branches, and all the possible policy-branch designs (even the most minimal) have a concept of a branch lifecycle, with a revivable 'dormant'/'active' state and a sticky 'revoked' state.
-Graydon
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |