On Sunday 10 June 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > On Sun, 10 Jun 2007, Johan Herland wrote: > > On Sunday 10 June 2007, Johannes Schindelin wrote: > > > As for the general direction of implementing notes as tags: If you > > > want to make them fetchable, you have to deal with conflicts. If you > > > want to be able to amend notes, _especially_ when they should be > > > fetchable, you want a history on them. > > > > I'm not sure what kind of notes you're talking about here. If you're > > talking about my git-note concept, I designed notes to be immutable > > (thus not amendable) and there is therefore _no_ merging or potential > > for conflicts between notes. > > Okay, that is one way you can go about implementing notes. > > > The only resolution needed is to figure out which order the notes for a > > given object should be presented. The default here is chronological > > sorting. > > There are several problems with that approach I'd like to point out: > > - In distributed environments, you can not rely on timestamps. Ever. Not really, but that doesn't stop many programs from trying anyway... (e.g. email clients). And still, it's not like the date (or sorting) is crucial to the 'notes' concept or implementation. > - If a note is deleted, you will fetch it again as long as the other side > did not delete it. Yep. This was considered an acceptable tradeoff in the design. But I understand that some people won't like it. > - You cannot undo a typo (since the notes are immutable, you would see > both versions), once the typoed note was fetched. Yep. Also a tradeoff in the design. Also going to piss off some people, I guess. > Basically, everything I see as a problem here suggests that note writing > is very much like working on a branch. That's why I suggest to treat it > exactly like a branch to begin with. I see you point. BTW, I have some patches implementing the 'notes' concept on top of the softrefs patches. They're just lying around now waiting to be cleaned up and sent to the list, but I'm not sure it's worth it, since they don't add anything that's not in your lightweight annotation patch... ...Johan -- Johan Herland, <johan@xxxxxxxxxxx> www.herland.net - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
