comment
This commit is contained in:
parent
a7ae014eb6
commit
d2a87d4a1b
1 changed files with 34 additions and 0 deletions
|
@ -0,0 +1,34 @@
|
|||
[[!comment format=mdwn
|
||||
username="joey"
|
||||
subject="""comment 2"""
|
||||
date="2023-07-31T17:12:52Z"
|
||||
content="""
|
||||
This seems like a pretty good idea. In particular, I think that the
|
||||
`not onlyingroup=offline-backup` example is persuasive. The
|
||||
`field` group example might be able to be dealt with by having
|
||||
a `collected` group and using `copies=collected:1` in repositories
|
||||
that only want a copy of data once it's been collected from the field.
|
||||
|
||||
Hmm, one problem is that if you have 2 groups that you are using
|
||||
onlyingroup with, eg
|
||||
`(not onlyingroup=offline-backup) and (not onlyingroup=offline-archive)`.
|
||||
A file that is in two repositories, one for each group, will not match.
|
||||
|
||||
One way to address that would be something like
|
||||
`onlyingroups=offline-backup,offline-archive` which would match
|
||||
on presence in any listed groups. I don't really like that this has
|
||||
its own ANDing happening inside a term of a preferred content expression
|
||||
though.
|
||||
|
||||
What is onlyingroup supposed to do when a repository is in the
|
||||
specified group, but also in another group? My first reaction was that
|
||||
it should never match when content is in such a repository, since the
|
||||
content is indeed present in another group.
|
||||
But that doesn't really seem useful.
|
||||
|
||||
If it treated a repository that's in the specified group, but also is
|
||||
in other groups, as matching, then it would be possible to put a repository
|
||||
in groups offline and backup and match on `not onlyingroup=offline`.
|
||||
I like this better than the `onlyingroups=offline-backup,offline-archive`
|
||||
because it's simpler and more composable.
|
||||
"""]]
|
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue