Re: [Monotone-devel] Re: user-friendly hash formats, redux

[Oren Ben-Kiki]

On Friday 10 December 2004 19:55, Nathaniel Smith wrote:
> ... Monotone needs some concept of "permitted committers".  (It's
> very very high on my list at least, once some of the bug churn right
> now stabilizes.)  But I think we can achieve something more flexible
> than requiring every branch to have a single owner.

Using a single branch key is the simplest way to go about it. Nobody 
said this key has to be your personal key; the system should make it 
easy to use a per-branch key. This is as flexible as you want - if you 
want someone else to be able to commit to the branch, give him a copy 
of the key.

> You can 
> definitely have control, and ways to keep track of which committed
> changes are not actually in your branch (because the committers don't
> have permissions), i.e. "proposed bug fixes", keep track of merging
> them, etc., without a unique owner.

You certainly achieve all these things using a separate mechanism. 
However, the simplest to do this is with an owner key and a concept of 
forks-in-branch. It all meshes together - control over your branch, 
stable friendly revision ids, two-way compatibility with CVS-like 
systems...

Have fun,

 Oren Ben-Kiki