Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: designing how to kill pristine trees

[Robert Collins]

On Sat, 2003-10-04 at 04:29, Pau Aliagas wrote:


> People who really would care about cached revisions are, unfortunately, a 
> minority, probably very well represented in the current list; most of 
> people would never care. Why make things more complicated? If you want to 
> manage cahed revisions, use the library commands :)

a cache and a library are different in goal, if not implementation. I
have some revisions that are very expensive to rebuild. I have those in
my library, and I would consider it a bug if tla -ever- removed those
'automatically'. Conversely, for things like the tla trees, which I
don't want any dedicated space in my revlib for, a cache would be ideal,
as it would cut down the duplicate pristine trees.

In short: trying to combine them is premature. The argument of less code
is not very effective: combine the code, struture them the same, but
only magic-trim the cache.

Rob
-- 
GPG key available at: <http://members.aardvark.net.au/lifeless/keys.txt>.

signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part