packs and knits

[Aaron Bentley]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Robert Collins wrote:
>>> so it makes sense to me to name the record
>>> ('text', fileid, revisionid). (for a revision knit that would be
>>> ('revision', revisionid, etc) - just namespacing.
>> How would you name a fulltext?
> 
> ('text', fileid, revisionid). This is not necessarily the final scheme -
> I'm trying to change one variable at a time at the moment.

Okay.  In the final scheme, we may want provide deltas for records that
also have fulltexts.  (The fulltexts can be derived from the deltas, so
they are *derivable data* that could optionally be stripped.)  That
would make generation of bundles faster, since it would be more a matter
of filtering out fulltexts than generating anything new.

>>> If this makes sense I'll put a patch together to do a Pack version bump
>>> and API bump to allow tuple based naming.
>> I think tuple-based naming would be very nice, and I wish I'd had it for
>>  Bundle format 4.
>>
>> How will your proposed bumps affect Bundles?
> 
> 0.18 has your bundle format 4 right?

No, but 0.19 is expected to.

> So, there will be a new bundle
> signature for bundles with tuple based names. We may choose to write the
> old signature out when the name is compatibly encoded with the original
> bundle code.

I mainly was curious about whether it would be possible to emit format 4
bundles after your changes.  It sounds like it will.

I think we should hold off on implementing new bundle formats until it
is clear whether we should just reuse the repository pack format for the
purpose.  Even if we don't, we can still try to ensure that similar data
is encoded in similar ways.

Aaron
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFGuHHU0F+nu1YWqI0RAinGAJ4oTDyg0XrTg5n+WlFCFUOLHOfPKACePktu
7WhebTl7hz8NjJ2luPgyrnI=
=GNyG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----