From: Jon Seymour <jon.seymour@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 14 May 2005 05:02:41 GMT
Subject: Re: [PATCH] [RFD] Add repoid identifier to commit [its a workspace id, isn't it?]
Message-ID: <2cfc403205051322026f3189da@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <2cfc403205051316495b46115e@mail.gmail.com>

Of course, this graph wasn't really the best example of a traditional
SCM branch or the point I was trying to make.
> 
> Rn -------------
> |      \         \
> Rn-1 Ba,n   Bb,n
> |     /             |
> Rn-2             |
> |       \           |
> Rn-3 Ba,n-1  |
> |    /             /
> Rn-4 -----------

It's more like:

Tn     B,W(a),n
|        |                 \
|        B,W(a),n-1   B,W(b),n-1
|        |                  |
Tn-1  |                   |
|        B,W(a),1------|
|       /
Tn-2

Branch B diverges from the main trunk T, parallel (but frequently
convergent) development in branch B happens in two workspaces W(a) and
W(b).

So a branchid would track all commits that contribute to a branch,
while a workspace id would track which commits happened in which
workspace, to enable the reconstruction of the merge order of the
global history with respect to the workspaces that perform commits.

jon.
-- 
homepage: http://www.zeta.org.au/~jon/
blog: http://orwelliantremors.blogspot.com/