[Monotone-devel] Re: Deleting branches

[Bruce Stephens]

Derek Scherger <address@hidden> writes:

[...]

> It's not hard code wise but the fact that things are distributed
> poses a bit of a problem.  Deleted branches may reappear after
> syncing with someone who has not (yet?) deleted the branch.

Ah, that's true.  Similarly, I suppose one might delete a branch, but
then decide to use that branch name again in the future.

[...]

> I think the idea of a lua hook like ignore_branch(name) might be a
> good idea. Although the exact implications of what this might do
> could be complicated. If all it does is hide them from list branches
> then it's about a 10 minute job. But branches are used in lots of
> places and whether such a hook should be consulted in varoius other
> instances would take some thinking. I suppose once the hook exists
> it could be applied to other cases as they arise.

Yeah, that's what bothered me.  I know I haven't user monotone enough
to have an idea of what the implications might be.  It seems like a
safer direction to go in: no data is being deleted, we're just
reducing what's ordinarily displayed, which (I think) is what the goal
is: you create branches for all kinds of purposes, and some of them
eventually aren't important any more, so you don't want to see them.

> Some netsync friendly way to rename a branch might also be good, but
> this does need to work in a way that your branches get renamed after
> syncing with me. A table of branch names and associated sha1 id's
> that are used in branch certs would work but starts to feel like
> branch names are being versioned.

Maybe.  That sounds a bit horribly meta, though.

>> branches" so that you can see them when you really want to, or maybe
>> "list all branches" or something.
>
> Perhaps "monotone -norc ls branches" to avoid the ignore_branch
> hook?

Yes, possibly.  That would certainly work.  I have this vague feeling
that switching off the rc files is a bigger, more global, thing than
just showing all branches rather than the interesting ones.  However,
probably I'm generalising my intuitions too much.

> The ignore hook was so easy I went ahead and wrote it. You can get
> it via netsync from www.echologic.com. Copy the ignore_file hook,
> rename it to ignore_branch and have fun.

Cool.

> Right away I wonder if netsync should consult this hook... ;)

Yeah.  I wonder, too...