Re: [Monotone-devel] Certificates for files

[Thomas Haas]

Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 08, 2005 at 02:59:19PM +0200, Thomas Haas wrote:
> 
>>The concept section of the monotone documentation states, that
>>certificates may be issued for files as well (and the feature might be
>>removed).
> 
> 
> Oops, out of date documentation.  Missed that paragraph before; I've
> just removed it.
> 
> 
>>We would like to make use of certificates on file level to support the
>>implementation of simple workflows, ie. approval and review processes.
>>
>>I failed to create a certificate for a file using monotone 0.22.
>>--  Has the feature been removed?
> 
> 
> Yes, back in early February (0.17, looks like).
> 
> 
>>--  If no, how can I issue certificates for files?
>>--  If yes, any chance of getting it back?
> 
> 
> The old file certificate stuff wasn't actually useful, which is why it
> was removed; it doesn't have useful semantics.  Certs were attached to
> particular file hashes, rather than "logical files".  So certs applied
> to particular file contents, without any attention to which file it
> was, what revision it was in, or anything like that.
> 
> 
>>Of course, the certificate could be created for the revision and include
>> the file identification(s) it is referring to. But I would not want to
>>establish something new on such a workaround.
> 
> 
> Can you give some more details on what sort of workflow thing you're
> putting together?  What were you planning to use file certs for?  That
> way we can figure out if there's a better way to do it with revision
> certs, or if there's some way we should add back file certs that would
> actually be useful?
> 
> -- Nathaniel
> 

I intended to make use monotone's wonderful concept of certificates for
making statements about reviews and sign-offs, e.g. during the release
process: a file, e.g. the readme, gets reviewed and signed-off for a
release. The review and approval is recorded using a certificate.

The certificate states, that a given revision of a file has been
reviewed or signed-off for inclusion in a given release. Such a
statement is not valid for the whole tree, but only for the revision of
a file or set of files.

Regards
- tom