On Feb 11, 2004, at 3:40 PM, Avi Bryant wrote:

> I guess the question is whether we want to continue having the 
> ChangeSet as the One True Format that gets to go into the update 
> stream (and convert everything else to it, like the MC->.cs transation 
> service that Marcus suggested), or whether we want to allow for the 
> possibility of alternate update formats.  Obviously we have to have 
> support in the image for any formats we put into the update stream, so 
> we shouldn't be too loose about what we accept.  But if a lot of code 
> does start appearing in a certain format (.sar, .mcz, maybe Rosetta 
> somewhere down the line), I don't see a problem with allowing it into 
> the stream.

I think the update stream should continue to be change sets only.

What we need to work on is making other update mechanisms equally easy 
to use and creating distribution images that contain code not managed 
by the update stream.

In other words, the update stream should continue to be change sets 
only, but it shouldn't be the One True Mechanism for distributing code.

Colin