"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
zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss

Reply via email to