Re: [Monotone-devel] Rosterify and certificate keys

[Joel Crisp]

Hi Richard

I think you might have missed the point slightly...If I understand this correctly, he made the changelog in the past incorporating 
reversion hashes which have now changed due to the 'rostification' of the database....so the historical fact is that he HAS written 
down specific hashes which have now changed.

In which case, your comment about the relevancy is accurate, but inapplicable.

On the other had, montone clearly states it is not a 1.0 product, so anyone using it must be aware that the only certain thing is 
change.... ;-)

Joel

Richard Levitte - VMS Whacker wrote:
> In message <address@hidden> on Mon, 10 Apr 2006 17:25:56 +0200, Tom Koelman 
> <address@hidden> said:
>
> tkoelman> Another thing I noticed is that, understandably, all
> tkoelman> revision hashes have changed. This has the unfortunate side
> tkoelman> effect that propage Changelog entries make no sense anymore,
> tkoelman> as they contain two revision hashes from the old database.
> tkoelman> Also, some of my handwritten changelog entries have the same
> tkoelman> problem. Is there some way in which I can replace these old
> tkoelman> revision hashes with their new counterparts?
>
> You can add a comment if you wish, but that really just pushes it into
> the future, if there's another rebuild needed.  The revs in the merge
> and propagate changelogs are really irrelevant, the ancestors of the
> merge/propagate are registered separately, and are always correct.  Of
> course, that doesn't help your hand written changelogs, but then, in
> what situations do you end up writing down a specific revision hash?
>
> Cheers,
> Richard
>
> -----
> Please consider sponsoring my work on free software.
> See http://www.free.lp.se/sponsoring.html for details.

smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature