From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S263193AbTIARmy (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 13:42:54 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263185AbTIARlR (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 13:41:17 -0400 Received: from smtp.bitmover.com ([192.132.92.12]:35821 "EHLO smtp.bitmover.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S263181AbTIARkm (ORCPT ); Mon, 1 Sep 2003 13:40:42 -0400 Date: Mon, 1 Sep 2003 10:40:32 -0700 From: Larry McVoy To: Christoph Hellwig , Jakob Oestergaard , Albert Cahalan , Larry McVoy , linux-kernel mailing list , ak@suse.de Subject: Re: bitkeeper comments Message-ID: <20030901174032.GD16620@work.bitmover.com> Mail-Followup-To: Larry McVoy , Christoph Hellwig , Jakob Oestergaard , Albert Cahalan , Larry McVoy , linux-kernel mailing list , ak@suse.de References: <20030901170218.A24713@infradead.org> <20030901172334.GE14716@unthought.net> <20030901182827.A26176@infradead.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20030901182827.A26176@infradead.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.4i X-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam (whitelisted), SpamAssassin (score=0.5, required 7, AWL, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 06:28:27PM +0100, Christoph Hellwig wrote: > On Mon, Sep 01, 2003 at 07:23:34PM +0200, Jakob Oestergaard wrote: > > There is an important difference. > > > > If I send you a mail saying "X" and you change it to say "Y" and put "Y" > > in the source tree, fine. It was a mail between us, noone except you > > and me will know. If I think it's wrong, maybe I can make you submit > > "X" to the source tree instead, with an explanation. > > > > Everything that was ever publicly visible, stays publicly visible, even > > with the the revised comments, thanks to the revision history. > > > > But changing the source tree revision history retroactively, that's bad. > > It defies the purpose of revision control itself. > > > > The source tree is a public record. People will remember "this said 'Y' > > I'm sure, but now it says 'X', why is that?" - and noone can answer. > > History forgotten. > > Yupp, that's what I meant. I certainly don't want a thought police > on my source trees. Trivial w/ the current BK because the comments aren't versioned. Just have someone be elected as the archiver and have them have a cron job which pulls bkbits.net every 20 minutes or so. Then if the comments are ever changed your archive will have the originals. -- --- Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm