Re: [Monotone-devel] Keyword substitution?

[Nathaniel Smith]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2005 at 10:21:01PM -0700, Todd A. Jacobs wrote:
> Why not? Just because a given revision needs to have common ancestors 
> doesn't mean that *all* ancestors are present in the revision history. 
[...]
> Pardon the poor diagramming, and the oversimplification, but it seems to 
> me that R3 won't contain the entire revision history stored in the other 
> repositories--just enough patch sets to create a common ancestor for 
> head revisions.

This isn't true, actually.  In monotone currently, if you have a
revision, you necessarily have every single ancestor of it.  Really,
all of them.

(At some point, we need to add some way to have a "history horizon"
that you don't fetch things beyond, because otherwise large, old
projects are very hard to deal with.  But that's not really relevant
here, I don't think; and we can't add it until we commit to an
approach to merging, since your merge algorithm determines what sort
of history you can throw away and still have a usable repo...)

In the mean time, while we debate things:

#!/bin/sh -e
# Usage: update-site $DB $BRANCH $REMOTESPEC
CODIR=/tmp/$$.codir
monotone --db=$1 co -b $2 $CODIR
REV=`cat $CODIR/MT/revision`
rm -rf $CODIR/MT
find $CODIR -type f | while read F; do
  echo -e "\n# source revision: $REV" >>$F
done
scp -r $CODIR $3
rm -rf $CODIR

-- Nathaniel

-- 
When the flush of a new-born sun fell first on Eden's green and gold,
Our father Adam sat under the Tree and scratched with a stick in the mould;
And the first rude sketch that the world had seen was joy to his mighty heart,
Till the Devil whispered behind the leaves, "It's pretty, but is it Art?"
  -- The Conundrum of the Workshops, Rudyard Kipling

This email may be read aloud.