Re: Semantics of Move

2013-09-03 Thread Julian Foad
On 2013-08-16, Blair Zajac wrote: > Julian Foad wrote: On 08/15/2013 08:01 AM, Julian Foad wrote: > I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move > operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any > implementation. > > A versioned move of

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-16 Thread Blair Zajac
On 08/16/2013 04:14 AM, Julian Foad wrote: Branko Čibej wrote: On 16.08.2013 04:48, Blair Zajac wrote: On 08/15/2013 08:01 AM, Julian Foad wrote: I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any implement

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-16 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: > On 16.08.2013 04:48, Blair Zajac wrote: >> On 08/15/2013 08:01 AM, Julian Foad wrote: >>> I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move >>> operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any >>> implementation. >>> >>> A versioned move o

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-15 Thread Branko Čibej
On 16.08.2013 04:48, Blair Zajac wrote: > On 08/15/2013 08:01 AM, Julian Foad wrote: >> I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move >> operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any >> implementation. >> >> A versioned move of the node with node id “N”, with re

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-15 Thread Blair Zajac
On 08/15/2013 08:01 AM, Julian Foad wrote: I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any implementation. A versioned move of the node with node id “N”, with respect to two revisions rX and rY (X < Y), shall mean:

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-15 Thread Julian Foad
Branko Čibej wrote: > On 15.08.2013 17:01, Julian Foad wrote: >>  Is this acceptable? > > Looks OK, from a quick review. > >> This means that combining the two separately committed >> changes "copy" and "move a child" into a single commit will >> result in semantic data loss, which we are trying

Re: Semantics of Move

2013-08-15 Thread Branko Čibej
On 15.08.2013 17:01, Julian Foad wrote: > Is this acceptable? Looks OK, from a quick review. > This means that combining the two separately > committed changes "copy" and "move a child" into a single commit will > result in semantic data loss, which we are trying to avoid. Not really. The copied

Semantics of Move

2013-08-15 Thread Julian Foad
I propose the following logical semantics of the versioned move operation that is the basis of move tracking, independent of any implementation. A versioned move of the node with node id “N”, with respect to two revisions rX and rY (X < Y), shall mean: * Same node id. A node with node id N ex