Stacked branching question

[Nicholas Allen]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
 
Aaron Bentley wrote:
| Nicholas Allen wrote:
| > I always thought the idea of a global cache of revisions would make
| > sense.
|
| We do not.  We want to make sure data doesn't get lost, and a global
| cache makes that far, far too easy.
How does data get lost by having a global cache? I don't understand your 
point. I am not suggesting that data would *only* be stored in the 
global cache but *also* be stored there. Therefore data is actually less 
likely to be lost and not more likely. It's just when retrieving a 
revision it would first check the cache so it doesn't have to go over 
the network - it would exist only to reduce network transmissions. Once 
it gets the revision (from the cache or remotely) it would be stored in 
the branch's repository as it normally would. If it did not have it in 
the cache it would download it, add it to the cache, and return it. The 
caller would not know if it came from the cache or was really downloaded.

Or perhaps I misunderstood your point...

Cheers,

Nick
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
 
iD8DBQFIhKrjbpmWsXfOU58RAn1KAJ4rCrNcG+VDfrHcMQLAkAV5LTPecACeKWpF
wF/gZRcLjM90Oz0/y5lieME=
=SHRO
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----