Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 1 Sep 2003 10:40:32 -0700 | From | Larry McVoy <> | Subject | Re: bitkeeper comments |
| |
On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 06:28:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 07:23:34PM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote: > > There is an important difference. > > > > If I send you a mail saying "X" and you change it to say "Y" and put "Y" > > in the source tree, fine. It was a mail between us, noone except you > > and me will know. If I think it's wrong, maybe I can make you submit > > "X" to the source tree instead, with an explanation. > > > > Everything that was ever publicly visible, stays publicly visible, even > > with the the revised comments, thanks to the revision history. > > > > But changing the source tree revision history retroactively, that's bad. > > It defies the purpose of revision control itself. > > > > The source tree is a public record. People will remember "this said 'Y' > > I'm sure, but now it says 'X', why is that?" - and noone can answer. > > History forgotten. > > Yupp, that's what I meant. I certainly don't want a thought police > on my source trees.
Trivial w/ the current BK because the comments aren't versioned. Just have someone be elected as the archiver and have them have a cron job which pulls bkbits.net every 20 minutes or so. Then if the comments are ever changed your archive will have the originals. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |