[Prophesy] General questions

[Rasmus Andersen]

On Mon, May 06, 2002 at 10:39:03AM +0200, Rasmus Andersen wrote:
> I'll have to try this. I think that my current third-hard impressions
> are too vague for this.

That would be 'third-hand', of course.

> > Next question: what is an object?  Can objects contain objects?  I would like 
> > an 'change' to be an object, that is, I would like to be able to see how a 
> > patch evolves, just as we can see how the underlying source evolves as well.
> 
> I think objects can contain objects. That way merges can be objects too,
> containing the objects merged as its revision history.

That was perhaps a bit too short: I was thinking of a change/patch as an
object. A patchset would then be a collection of objects, still with
some of the properties of the basic object (comments, generations), and
a merge would then be a new patchset with the aggregated/resolved
constituting patchsets, comments etc.

> > Bitkeeper question: once we apply a changeset to a source base, does the 
> > Bitkeeper database continue to maintain the identity of the changset as we 
> > carry the source base through subsequent reversions?  I.e., will Bitkeeper 
> > let us talk about the 'htree' patch, and let the thing evolve along with the 
> > source, so that we could pull out the 2.4.17 version of htree, or the 2.4.18 
> > version, etc?
> 
> I dont think so but it is a BS guess. One problem would be later
> changes modifying htree code, making extraction of the htree patch
> difficult.

Another clarification: The first sentence above goes for the BK
question. The rest is more general; how to keep conflicting
patches seperate?

> 
> Another question is your described effort in managing change sets
> for your patches. Could you decribe this a bit so we could see if
> we could envision something to make that easier?

Rasmus