Re: [Monotone-devel] merging branch to allow 'automate stdio' over the network

[Timothy Brownawell]

Stephen Leake wrote:
> Thomas Keller <address@hidden> writes:

>> Ok, right, but the main point is: automate's output is for implementors
>> only and therefor less likely subject to change or even to localize, so
>> real "remote database functionalities" implemented like this feel like a
>> hack.
> 
> What are the use cases for user use of remote database access? The
> only one I've come across is 'ls branches', because I want to limit
> the initial pull. After that, I'm happy with netsync.

At the moment there's real remote access with 'automate branches' and
"remote" access by a web frontend that's probably running on the same box.

Given the right additional automate commands it could probably be used
as infrastructure for various things (pretending to be a centralized
system, pulling additional history on-demand after we get around to
implementing partial-pull, maybe implementing partial pull in the first
place). I think "pretending to be centralized" is probably the only one
that's a case of direct use by a person, and that would probably be
better handled by figuring out partial pull.