"David Dyer-Bennet" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/6/06, Erik Trimble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > First of all, let's agree that this discussion of File Versioning makes
> > no more reference to its usage as Version Control. That is, we aren't
> > going to talk about it being useful for source code, other than in the
> > context where a source code file is a document, like any other text
> > document. File Versioning and Version Control are separate things, with
> > different purposes and feature sets.
>
> Hmm; the most important uses of file versioning come, in my opinion,
> when working on source code. But for handling very different
> situations than source control does.
>
> > OK. So, now we're on to FV. As Nico pointed out, FV is going to need a
> > new API. Using the VMS convention of simply creating file names with a
> > version string afterwards is unacceptible, as it creates enormous
> > directory pollution, not to mention user confusion. So, FV has to be
> > invisible to non-aware programs.
>
> Strongly disagree, twice.
>
> Having FV invisible to programs not updated to specially support it is
> IMHO unacceptable, and would render the feature useless.
Making it visible to programs causes many problems with OSIX compatibility and
will enforce to change many programs.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
zfs-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
