I read about that and it was my understanding that the change set actually 
knows where the old code was, but the change sorter itself only ever shows 
the current method.  Is this incorrect?


>From: stephane ducasse <stephane.ducasse at free.fr>
>Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>To: The general-purpose Squeak developers 
>list<squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>Subject: Re: Monticello 2 question (sort of)
>Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2007 21:54:18 +0200
>
>Just a remark yu may have noticed (in that case do not care of my  remarks)
>that changeset do not record the changes themselves but the fact that  
>something changed.
>You cannot have two versions of the same method in different cs  loaded in 
>the image.
>
>
>On 27 avr. 07, at 21:24, J J wrote:
>
>>So, I guess this was a dumb question?
>>
>>I am curious because I was considering testing some code myself to  make a 
>>current generation change management system based on the  change set 
>>mechanism that Squeak already has.  But if Monticello 2  is already going 
>>to do this then I'll just wait and focus on other  things.
>>
>>
>>>From: "J J" <azreal1977 at hotmail.com>
>>>Reply-To: The general-purpose Squeak developers list<squeak- 
>>>dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
>>>To: squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org
>>>Subject: Monticello 2 question (sort of)
>>>Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:43:10 +0000
>>>
>>>Hi all,
>>>
>>>I was just thinking about Monticello 2 and wondering what the  strategy 
>>>for creating revisions is.
>>>
>>>In darcs (and afaik all modern revision systems) the way it works  is, I 
>>>have a local repository and there can be any number of  remote 
>>>repositories.  So if we had one central repository called  e.g. 
>>>SqueakSource, after the initial push, my local repository is  in sync 
>>>with SqueakSource.  I can now make changes and publish  them locally.  If 
>>>I push these changes to the SqueakSource  repository all the system has 
>>>to do is see if the revision has not  changed, and if it hasn't apply all 
>>>my change sets to get back in  sync and so on.
>>>
>>>It strikes me that Squeak can do this very easily.  We already  have 
>>>change sets that actually seem very good.  So we could do the  same 
>>>thing; when I do an initial publish to the central repository  I am in 
>>>sync.  Now the system creates a new change set for all  changes I do from 
>>>this point forward.  Later on when I try to sync  again, if the version 
>>>number has not changed the system need only  apply the change sets I have 
>>>made since the sync took place.  If  the version number has changed, a 
>>>simple conflict resolution can  be done.
>>>
>>>The key point here is; it looks to me like the current Monticello  is 
>>>actually scanning the whole image to find out what has  changed.  This is 
>>>not necessary as all that information and more  can be retrieved via the 
>>>existing change set mechanism.  The only  change would need to be that 
>>>after you publish to a repository,  Monticello needs to rename your 
>>>"current" change set.  If it  doesn't then the next time you publish it 
>>>wont see any change sets  that aren't present in the repository and 
>>>decide no work was  done.  Or it can look if the dates are different, but 
>>>then it  would have to scan the whole change set to see what is 
>>>different.   It saves processing by simply controlling the change set 
>>>names.
>>>
>>>Another advantage is, we can easily have the darcs ability to only  apply 
>>>certain change sets.  Using the change set tools in the  image I can 
>>>create new change sets and push different changes into  those, so that if 
>>>I made a big change I can split it up into  several different change 
>>>sets.  Then I would have the ability to  say e.g. only publish the first 
>>>one and the last, but skip the  middle.
>>>
>>>What do you all think?  Is this already what it's doing and I just  
>>>didn't notice?  Thoughts?
>>>
>>>Thanks,
>>>Jason
>>>
>>>_________________________________________________________________
>>>Download Messenger. Join the i’m Initiative. Help make a  difference 
>>>today. http://im.live.com/messenger/im/home/? source=TAGHM_APR07
>>>
>>>
>>
>>_________________________________________________________________
>>Mortgage rates near historic lows. Refinance $200,000 loan for as  low as 
>>$771/month* https://www2.nextag.com/goto.jsp? product=100000035&url=% 
>>2fst.jsp&tm=y&search=mortgage_text_links_88_h27f8&disc=y&vers=689&s=40 
>>56&p=5117
>>
>>
>>
>
>

_________________________________________________________________
Interest Rates NEAR 39yr LOWS!  $430,000 Mortgage for $1,299/mo - Calculate 
new payment 
http://www.lowermybills.com/lre/index.jsp?sourceid=lmb-9632-19132&moid=14888