[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Date Index][Thread Index]
- To: <mark>
- Subject: "Version" Aversion
- From: Eric Dean Tribble <tribble>
- Date: Mon, 11 Dec 89 20:58:01 PST
- Cc: <bobp>, <xanatech>, <bobp>, <joel>
- In-reply-to: <MarkS.Miller'smessageofMon>,20 PST <8912120255.AA19465@xanadu>
In a Xanadu environment, even though Bobp and Marcs have separate
front-end machines, they probably share the same server. Thus they
could pass the primary "Xanadu Glossary" Bert back and forth.
I'm not sure cross-machine hopping of Berts is that far away. We can
get much of the capability by letting Berts get hopped remotely
(without migrating them). The normal double-bert scheme for editing
let's us edit efficiently.
My two cents to clear up some points for MarkM:
There are at least two different notions being confused here.
First, there's the distinction between horizontal versioning
(the 2 copies held by marcs and bobp) and vertical versioning
(represented by the successive states visited by marcs and bobp
in their respective work).
Does your "horizontal versioning" correspond to my "replicated
No. It corresponds to having multiple Berts onto the same Orgl (or
within the same historical trace)
Does your "vertical versioning" correspond to my "state"s or
to my "versioning"?
My canonical example of vertical versioning is successive versions of a
manual (1.0, 1.1, 2.0, etc.). These could be represented by a trail
of frozen Berts, or by Stamps. Regardless, I think they are separate
from the trail of Stamps left in a historical trace.