On Thursday, July 24, 2003, at 12:57  PM, Avi Bryant wrote:

>
> On Thu, 24 Jul 2003, Colin Putney wrote:
>
>> These defaults are just for convenience, though, as you can choose
>> whatever name you want. The only restriction is that it must be unique
>> to the repository you're saving into. Having the author initials in 
>> the
>> name helps avoid name clashes between developers working in the same
>> repository.
>
> Actually, this currently isn't a strict restriction - just one that's
> enforced by the file-system based repositories.  I can certainly
> envision repositories (like, in fact, the DictionaryRepository used in
> MC's tests) that key on the UUID and are perfectly happy to have 
> duplicate
> names.  If we ever build, say, a PostgresRepository, it'll probably 
> work
> that way too.

Yes, quite true.

It would be better to say that repositories can impose restrictions on 
the names of the versions stored in it. This doesn't have to be related 
to the storage model, it could reflect, say, naming conventions for 
versions on different branches.

Colin