On 11-Jan-07, at 12:36 PM, Andreas Raab wrote:

> > What is wrong with this?
>
> Mostly it doesn't address the real issue and that's the limitation  
> of the sources and changes file to 32MB each. That we can preserve  
> the history by having a larger changes file is nice but not the  
> primary goal as far as I am concerned.

I'd go a bit further by complaining that the issue is really the deep  
assumption of sources being in files and having the files referred to  
by index and having the index and file position encrypted into rather  
less than a SmallInteger's worth of bits.

I agree with Ralph about the desirability of splitting things out,  
keeping histories in some outside dataset etc but I'm fairly sure we  
need to clean out the basic mechanism in order to do that. If we want  
to be able to keep the histories at all I think it makes sense to  
clean things up in a 3.8.1 image before adding the 3.9 work rather  
than trying to extract and synthesize it later.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
The best packed information most resembles random noise.