Re: [Monotone-devel] migrate required in 1.0dev?

[Thomas Keller]

Am 20.12.10 12:24, schrieb Stephen Leake:
> mtn 1.0dev is telling me a migrate is needed relative to mtn 0.99.1, but
> I don't see an entry in NEWS for that.
> 
> I guess it's this:
> 
>    f94d3092bdb3a65bceb1acd654d3e3c3f7df2676
>    2010-11-28T18:17:39  Timothy Brownawell  <address@hidden>
>      Better indexing for the revision_certs table, so that looking up the
>      certs on a particular revision is faster (can pull everything from the
>      index, without having to go look up in the table).
> 
> I added a generic "schema has changed" NEWS entry; I'm not clear whether
> we need to explain why.

Thanks for noting that. The justification for this change can be read here:

http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.monotone.devel/18555

I accepted it because the rules on database migrations weren't set into
stone at that day and because the change was simple, yet noticable
enough for our users. Tim, Stephe, feel free to expand the short note in
NEWS with a small sentence what use cases should benefit from that
change the most (from what I remember ls branches and au branches should
be the most important ones).

Thomas.

-- 
GPG-Key 0x160D1092 | address@hidden | http://thomaskeller.biz
Please note that according to the EU law on data retention, information
on every electronic information exchange might be retained for a period
of six months or longer: http://www.vorratsdatenspeicherung.de/?lang=en

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature