remove false starts, simplify

doc/todo/versioning_in_export_remotes.mdwn

@@ -5,62 +5,12 @@ content and it can be accessed using a version ID (that S3 returns when
 storing the content). So it should be possible for git-annex to allow
 downloading old versions of files from such a remote.
 
-## remote pair approach
+Basically, store the S3 version ID in git-annex branch and support
+downloading using it. 
 
-One way would be to have the S3 remote, when storing a file to a S3 bucket
+But this has the problem that dropping makes git-annex think it's not in S3
-that is known to support versioning, to add an url using the S3 version ID
+any more, while what we want for export is for it to be removed from the
-to the web remote.
+current bucket, but still tracked as present in S3.
-
-However, some remotes that support versioning won't be accessible via the
-web, so that's not a general solution.
-
-(Also, S3 buckets only support web access when configured to be public.)
-
-This generalizes to a pair of remotes, it could be S3+web or S3 could instantiate
-two remotes automatically, and use the second for versioned data.
-
-Note that location tracking info has to be carefully managed, to avoid
-there appearing to be two copies of data that's only really stored in one place.
-When uploading to S3, it should not yet add the url or mark the content 
-as present in the web. Then when dropping from S3, after the
-drop succeeds, it can mark the content as present in the web and add its url.
-
-There's a potential race there still, since the remote does not update location
-tracking when dropping, the caller of the remote does. So if S3 marks content
-as being present in the web, it will breifly appear present in both locations
-and break numcopies counting. Would need to extend the API to avoid this race.
-
-> Ah, but: exporttree remotes are always untrusted for other reasons,
-> so location tracking is less of a problem. Even if location tracking
-> shows the content in two places, a drop will skip the exporttree remote
-> so will only treat the pair as one copy.
-> 
-> So the location tracking problem is limited to --copies=N matching incorrectly,
-> and whereis listing both locations, and some preferred content 
-> expressions behaving in surprising ways.
-
-Unfortunately this remote pair approach will leak out into git-annex's interface;
-it will show two remotes. Not a problem for S3+web really, but if S3 instantiates
-an S3oldversions remote, that necessarily adds the potential for confusion,
-and adds complexity in configuration of preferred content settings, repo groups,
-etc.
-
-> Could flip it; make the main remote track the versioned data, and the
-> exporttree remote be secondary. Since only git-annex export/sync need to
-> access that remote, they could have a special case to look for such a
-> secondary remote and act on it. All other commands would only operate on
-> the main remote. Indeed, the secondary remote would not need to be
-> in the RemoteList at all.
-> 
-> Doesn't avoid preferred content etc complexity, still.
-
-## location tracking approach
-
-Another way is to store the S3 version ID in git-annex branch and support
-downloading using it. But this has the problem that dropping makes
-git-annex think it's not in S3 any more, while what we want for export
-is for it to be removed from the current bucket, but still tracked as
-present in S3.
 
 The drop from S3 could fail, or "succeed" in a way that prevents the location
 tracking being updated to say it lacks the content. Failing is how bup deals
@@ -75,7 +25,8 @@ and make at sync --content/assistant use that.
 
 Note that git-annex export does not rely on location tracking to determine
 which files still need to be sent to an export. It uses the export database
-to keep track of that.
+to keep track of that. This is important, because the location tracking
+won't be updated, as discussed above.
 
 ## final plan