[V3dot10] Re: RV: Do in a workspace and say if could build

[Ken Causey]

Lex,

I don't think that would be a good idea.  The fact is that the name is
not guaranteed to be unique.  It is quite possible to create two
different versions with the same name including the initials and version
number.  In fact I've simply been assuming that the 'two copies' of
these versions are in practice identical in the changes they make, but
may not in fact be the case.

Ken

On Wed, 2007-06-20 at 17:31 -0400, Lex Spoon wrote:
> Ken Causey <ken at kencausey.com> writes:
> > Well, isn't this fun. ;)
> > 
> > I tried this and all was going well until I got the very same complaint
> > 'Could not find version...' for Etoys-edc.23.  Etoys-edc.25 has an
> > ancester Etoys-edc.23 with a different UUID than the copy in the
> > repository... same story.
> 
> Well, they are supposed to be "universally unique", right?  So the
> more uniqueness, the better!
> 
> Seriously, it sounds like Monticello would be better off using the
> name of the package as the identifier, instead of a generated random
> number or whatever it uses.  In this case, "Etoys" would seem to make
> a great identifier.
> 
> Maybe it is not even too late.  Could the tools simply detect that the
> packages are using generated uuid's, and then guess a "uuid" by
> looking at the filename?  E.g., for a file named "Etoys-edc.23",
> quietly treating the uuid as "Etoys"?
> 
> 
> 
> -Lex

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/v3dot10/attachments/20070620/903b945a/attachment.pgp