| Re: Version Control Strategies For Block-Based Forths? |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
|
 |
Group: comp.lang.forth · Group Profile
Author: Jean-François MichaudJean-François Michaud Date: Sep 19, 2008 10:40
On Sep 19, 9:55 am, John Passaniti JapanIsShinto.com> wrote:> Jean-François Michaud wrote:
>> A simpler approach is to simply store the entire block while tying a
>> version number to it. Pulling the version is as simple as looking up
>> the associated pairs (version and block). This is simple to implement
>> but will rapidly become bulky space-wise; check-in/check-out is
>> necessary here as well. The same "multi" function applies under the
>> bulky solution. Rollback is the same as previously mentioned except
>> that here we delete whole blocks instead of deltas.
>
> Again, I'm not looking for a discussion on how to implement this. Â I am
> interested in existing strategies that others may have used because I'm
> looking for proven approaches, not an abstract discussion about how I
> might choose to implement this.
>
> The answer may simply be that nobody had ever implemented version
> control in block-based systems. Â That's fine, and if so it tells me that
> I'm not going to be considering proven approaches but something I invent
> for the particular project I'm considering.
Discussing with you is always difficult John. I didn't propose an
implementation as there are no implementation details. I'm outlining
the overall strategy. Two in fact. So to make things completely
transparent:
Strategy 1: Use delta storage
Stragegy 2: Use full block storage
Common to both strategies: Check-in/check-out is necessary otherwise
version control is meaningless, rollback is describes in context and
the *strategy* for rolling back is very simple in both cases. The
*strategy* for retrieving a version is clear in both cases although
slightly different and the multi block version retrieval strategy is
also very simple.
Jean-Francois Michaud
| 
