Re: [Monotone-devel] Approval revisited...

[Justin Patrin]

On 2/11/06, Nathaniel Smith <address@hidden> wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2006 at 05:25:36PM +0100, Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> > I'm taking a look at the current revision approval possibilities, and
> > there are things I don't quite understand.  Also, it looks like this
> > hasn't been looked at for ages.
>
> It hasn't.  It was sort of stuck in as a statement of intention,
> before anyone realized _quite_ how long it would take to get a solid
> VCS foundation so we could get back to the actual _workflow_ stuff
> that was the original goal...
>
> I don't know that there's a lot of point in trying to patch this up
> piecemeal; we don't have any coherent model for how review would work
> right now, and fiddling with the trust hook (which is also one of
> these vestigial has-been-there-forever, never-really-designed things)
> doesn't seem like it will really get us there?
>
> Personally, I think the functionality of 'disapprove' should move to
> 'revert' ('revert -r REV [RESTRICTION]; commit'), and 'approve' could
> just go away, or stay on until we have a real story, or whatever.
>

The name 'revert' of course makes sense for this, but this will also
clash with the 'revert' used to revert a change in a working copy....

> The real answer is the trust branch stuff, which is actually getting
> much closer now that we have rosters in and are starting to get handle
> on how we can get over the speed problems we've been facing forever.
> It will be nice if we can stop fighting fires for a bit... *knocks on
> wood*
>


--
Justin Patrin