Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Preliminary Arch Cache available

[Tom Lord]

    > From: address@hidden (James Blackwell)
    > Tom Lord:
    > > Are you considering the idea of *constructing* desirable cacherevs,
    > > regardless of whether or not they are actually there upstream?
    > >
    > > (I currently think you should but I don't think it's a special case.
    > > I think that ideally, that behavior will just "fall out, for free"
    > > from the cache code.)
    > >
    > I disagree. I think that revision A in the cache should be identical to
    > revision A in the archive. Though I've got more reasons, one reason
    > would be that it may not even be possible to build a fresh cacherev, due
    > to missing information (think a tag of a version in a no longer existant
    > archive).

The cacherev is well (objectively) defined even if your client doesn't
have enough information to build it.  But if your client does have
enough info -- why in the world shouldn't it?

There are a few intentional acts in arch (commit, tag, import) ---
lots of other stuff is deterministic on top of those.   Why would you
ignore that fact?

-t