Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Archive metadata

[David Allouche]

On Fri, Jan 23, 2004 at 04:21:57PM -0800, Scott Bronson wrote:
> On Fri, 2004-01-23 at 15:10, Tom Lord wrote:
> > 2) Storing metadata as revisions is a good idea -- consider recording
> >    the metadata in the log messages.
> 
> As discussed on IRC today, storing metadata in the log is
> a decent solution to the closing/microbranching problem
> (see PS below).

That's what I previously proposed:

http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2004-01/msg00775.html

> Now, if you want abrowse to show only open projects, it would
> fetch the last patchlog from each tree and display only those
> that do not include Tree-Closed.  The performance hit should
> be quite small.

Wrong. Versions are leafs of the tree traversed by abrowse. Performing a
cat-archive-log for each version _is_ a big performance hit:

http://mail.gnu.org/archive/html/gnu-arch-users/2004-01/msg00791.html

> So, would this be a good idea?

Not too bad. Not too good either.

> * The sealing problem: There are a number of different reasons
> to want to seal a tree so there's minor disagreement about
> how exactly seal should be used.  There's desire to stretch it
> past its original design intent.

Just said so. See former reference.

As tom proposed it, I think the best way to handle this issue is to have
a archive-metadata--closed--1 version which contains empty trees. The
"closed" information for all branches in the archive is stored in the
log of this branch latest revision. E.g:

frob--devo--1: cycled
  address@hidden

frob--nicate--1: cancelled
  Too hackish to live.

frob--tags--1: released

This is much more efficient, since only one "cat-archive-log" is needed
to get all the "closed" information for the whole archive, instead of
one cat-archive-log for every version.

-- 
                                                            -- ddaa