--- a/docs/obs-concept.rst Tue Mar 27 19:14:37 2012 +0200
+++ b/docs/obs-concept.rst Wed Mar 28 11:07:02 2012 +0200
@@ -1,17 +1,17 @@
-==============================
- Why Do We Need a New Concept
-==============================
+-----------------------------------------------------------
+Why Do We Need a New Concept
+-----------------------------------------------------------
Current DVCS are great tool to forge a series of flawless changeset on your own.
-But they perform poorly when is comes to **share** work in progress and
+But they perform poorly whe is comes to **share** work in progress and
**collaborate** on such work in progress.
When people forge new version of a changeset they create a new changeset and get
-ride of the original changeset. Difficulties to collaborate mostly came from the
+ride of the original changeset. Difficultis to collaborate mostly came from the
way old content are *removed* from repository.
Mercurial Approach: Strip
-=========================
+-----------------------------------------------------
With current version of mercurial, every changesets that exist in your
repository are *visible* and *meaningful*. To get ride of old changeset you
@@ -19,7 +19,7 @@
called *strip*. After the *strip* the repository looks like if the changeset
never existed.
-This approach is simple and effective but have a very big drawback: You can
+This approach is simple and effective but have a very big drawnback: You can
remove changesets from **your repository only**. If strip exists in other
repositories it will show of again and again. This only cure for this is to
strip the offending changeset from all repository. And operation at best
@@ -29,22 +29,23 @@
As consequence, **you can not rewrite something once you exchange it with
others**. The old version will still exists along side the new one [#]_.
-Moreover stripping changesets creates backup bundles. This allows
-restoration of the deleted changesets, but the process is painful.
+Moreover backup are create stripped changeset in most case. This allow
+restoration of old changeset but the process is painful.
Finally, as the repository format is not optimized for deletion. stripping a
-changeset may be slow in some situations.
+changeset may be slow in some situation.
+
To sum up, the strip approach is very simple but does not handle interaction
with the outer world. Which is unfortunate for a *Distributed* VCS.
-.. [#] various work around exists but they require their own workflows which are distinct from the very elegant basic workflow of Mercurial.
+.. [#] various work around exists but they are work around with their own flow.
Git Approach: Overwrite Reference
-=================================
+-----------------------------------------------------
-Git approach for repository is a bit more complex: Any number of
-changesets can exist in a repository. but **only changesets referenced by a git
+Git approach for repository is a bit more complex: They can be any amount of
+changeset can exist in a repository. but **only changesets referenced by a git
branch** are *visible* and *meaningful*.
@@ -58,51 +59,51 @@
Only B and A are visible.
-This simplifies the process of getting rid of old changesets. You can
-just leave them in place and move the reference on the new one. You
-can then propagate that change by moving the git-branch on remote host
-with the newer version of the marker overwriting the older one.
+This ease the process of getting ride of old changeset. You can just leave them
+in place and move the reference on the new one. You can then propagate those
+change by moving the git-branch on remote host, newer version overwritting the
+older one.
-This approach goes a bit further but still has a major drawback:
+This approach goes a bit further but still have major drawback:
-Because you **overwrite** the git-branch, you have no conflict resolution. The last
-to act wins. This makes collaboration on multiple changesets difficult because
-you can't merge concurrent updates on a changeset.
+Because you **overwrite** git-branch you have no conflit resolution. The last
+to spoke win. This make collaboration on multiple changeset difficult because
+you can't merge concurent update on changeset.
-Every overwrite is a forced operation where the operator say "Yes I want this to
-replace that. In highly distributed environments, a user may end up with conflicting
-references and no proper way to choose.
+Every overwrite is forced operation where the operator say "Yes I want this to
+replace that. On higly distributed environment user may end with conflicting
+reference with and no proper way to choose.
-Because of this way to visualize a repository, git-branches are a core
-part of git, which makes the user interface more complicated and
-constrains the ways to move through history.
+Because of this way to visualize a repository, git-branches are a very core
+part of git. This make user interface more complicated and move through history
+more constrainted.
-Finally, even if all older changeset still exist in the repository, access to them
+Finally, even if all older changeset still exist in the repository acces to them
is still painful.
-=============================
- The Obsolete Marker Concept
-=============================
+-----------------------------------------------------
+The Obsolete Marker Concept
+-----------------------------------------------------
-As None of the concepts was powerful enough to fulfill the need of safely rewriting
-history, including easy sharing and collaborating on mutable history, we needed another one.
+As None of the concept was powerful enough to embrace the need to safely rewrite
+history, easily share and collaborate on mutable history we needed another one.
Basic concept
-=============
+-----------------------------------------------------
-Every history rewriting operation stores the information that the old rewritten
-changeset is replaced by newer version in a given set of changeset.
+Every history rewriting operation stores the information that old rewritten
+changesets has newer version available in a set of changeset.
-All basic history rewriting operation can create an appropriate obsolete marker.
+All basic history rewriting operation can create a appropriate obsolete marker.
.. figure:: ./figures/example-1-update.*
@@ -146,15 +147,16 @@
changesets to **1** old changeset.
Basic Usage
-===========
+-----------------------------------------------------
-Obsolete markers create a perpendicular history: **a versioned changeset graph**. This means that offers the same features we have for
+Obsolete markers create a perpendicular history: **a versionned version of the
+changeset graph**. This means that we can have the same feature we have for
versioned files but applied to changeset:
-First: we can display a **coherent view** of the history graph in which only a
-single version of your changesets are displayed by the UI.
+First: we can display a **coherent view** of the history graph with only a
+single version of your changeset are displayed by the UI.
-Second, because obsolete changeset content is still **available**. You can
+Second, because obsolete changeset content are still **available**. You can
* **browse** the content of your obsolete commit,
@@ -170,52 +172,52 @@
as conflicting changes on file.
-Detecting and solving tricky situations
-======================================
+Detecting and solving tricky situation
+-----------------------------------------------------
-History rewriting can lead to complex situations. Obsolete marker introduce a
-simple representation of this complex reality. But people using complex workflows
-will one day or another have to face the intrinsic complexity of some
-situations.
+History rewriting can lead to complex situation. Obsolete marker introduce a
+simple representation this complex reality. But people using complex workflow
+will one day or another you have to face the intrinsics complexity of some
+situation.
-This section describes possible situations, defines precise sets of changesets
-involved in such situations and explains how error cases can automatically be
+This section describe possible situations, define precise set of changesets
+involved in such situation and explains how error case can we automatically
resolved using available information.
obsolete changesets
--------------------
+````````````````````
-Old changesets left behind by obsolete operation are called **obsolete**.
+Old changesets left behind by obsolete operation are said **obsolete**.
-With the current version of mercurial, this *obsolete* part is stripped from the
-repository before the end of every rewriting operation.
+With current version of mercurial, this *obsolete* part is stripped from the
+repository before the end of every rewritting operation.
.. figure:: ./figures/error-obsolete.*
Rebasing `B` and `C` on `A` (as `B'`, `C'`)
This rebase operation added two obsolete markers from new changesets to old
- changesets. These two old changesets are now part of the *obsolete* part of the
+ changesets. These Two old changesets are now part of the *obsolete* part of the
history.
-In most cases, the obsolete set will be fully hidden to both UI and discovery so
-the user does not have to care about them unless he wants to audit the history rewriting
+In most case the obsolete set will be fully hidden to both UI and discovery so
+user do not have to care about them unless he wants to audit history rewriting
operation.
Unstable changesets
--------------------
+```````````````````
-While exploring the possibilities of the obsolete a bit further, you may end up with
-*obsolete* changeset which have *non-obsolete* children. There is two common ways to
+While exploring obsolete marker possibility a bit further you way end up with
+*obsolete* changeset with *non-obsolete* children. There is two common ways to
achieve this:
* Pull a changeset based of an old version of a changeset [#]_.
* Use a partial rewriting operation. For example amend on a changeset with
- children .
+ childrens.
-*Non-obsolete* changeset based on *obsolete* one are called **unstable**
+*Non-obsolete* changeset based on *obsolete* one are said **unstable**
.. figure:: ./figures/error-unstable.*
@@ -233,7 +235,7 @@
the user of even carry them out for him.
-XXX details on automatic resolution for
+XXX details automatic resolution for
* movement
@@ -243,17 +245,17 @@
.. [#] For this to happen one needs to explicitly enable exchange of draft
- changesets. See phase help for details.
+ changeset. See phase help for details.
The two part of the obsolete set
---------------------------------
+``````````````````````````````````````
-The previous section show that there can be two kinds of an *obsolete* changeset:
+The previous section show that it could be two kinds of *obsolete* changeset:
-* an *obsolete* changeset with no or *obsolete* only descendants is called **extinct**.
+* *obsolete* changeset with no or *obsolete* only descendants, said **extinct**.
-* an *obsolete* changeset with *unstable* descendants is called **suspended**.
+* *obsolete* changeset with *unstable* descendants, said **suspended**.
.. figure:: ./figures/error-extinct.*
@@ -266,46 +268,46 @@
Because nothing outside the obsolete set default on *extinct* changesets, they
-can be safely hidden in the UI and even garbage collected. *Suspended* changesets
-have to stay visible and available until their unstable descendant are rewritten
-into stable version.
+can be safely hidden in the UI and even garbage collected. *Suspended* changeset
+have to stay visible and available until they unstable descendant are rewritten
+in stable version.
-Conflicting rewrites
----------------------
+Conflicting rewriting
+``````````````````````
If people start to concurrently edit the same part of the history they will
-likely meet conflicting situations when a changeset has been rewritten in two
-different ways.
+likely meet conflicting situation when a changeset have been rewritten in two
+different versions.
.. figure:: ./figures/error-conflicting.*
- Conflicting rewrite of `A` into `A'` and `A''`
+ Conflicting rewriting of `A` into `A'` and `A''`
-This kind of conflict is easy to detect with obsolete markers, because an obsolete
-changeset can have more than one new version. It may be seen as the multiple heads
-case which Mercurial warns you about on pull. It is resolved the same way by a merge of
+This kind of conflict is easy to detect with obsolete marker because an obsolete
+changeset have more than one new version. It may be seen as the multiple heads
+case Mercurial warn you about on pull. It is resolved the same way by a merge of
A' and A'' that will keep the same parent than `A'` and `A''` with two obsolete
markers pointing to both `A` and `A'`
.. warning:: TODO: Add a schema of the resolution. (merge A' and A'' with A as
ancestor and graft the result of A^)
-Allowing multiple new changesets to obsolete a single one allows to differenciate
-split changesets from history rewriting conflicts.
+Allowing multiple new changesets to obsolete a single one allow to distinct a
+splitted changeset from history rewriting conflict.
Reliable history
-----------------
+``````````````````````
-Obsolete marker help to smooth rewriting operation process. However they
+Obsolete marker really help to smooth rewriting operation process. However they
do not change the fact that **you should only rewrite the mutable part of the
-history**. The phase concept enforces this rule by explicitly defining a
-public immutable set of changesets. Rewriting operations refuse to work on
-public changesets, but there are still some corner cases where previously rewritten changesets
-are made public.
+history**. The phase concept enforce this rules by explicitly defining a
+public immutable set of changeset. Rewriting operation refuse to work on
+public changeset, but they is still some corner case where changesets
+rewritten in the past are made public.
-Special rules apply for obsolete markers pointing to public changesets
+Special rules apply for obsolete marker pointing to public changeset
* Public changesets are excluded from the obsolete set (public changeset are
never hidden or candidate to garbage collection)
@@ -323,26 +325,26 @@
Conclusion
-==========
+----------------
-The obsolete marker is a powerful concept that allows mercurial to safely handle
+Obsolete marker is a powerful concept that allow mercurial to safely handle
history rewriting operations. It is a new type of relation between Mercurial
-changesets which tracks the result of history rewriting operations.
+changesets that track the result of history rewriting operations.
-This concept is simple to define and provides a very solid base for:
+This concept is simple to define and provides a very solid base to:
- Very fast history rewriting operations,
-- auditable and reversible history rewriting process,
+- auditable and reversible history rewritting process,
- clean final history,
-- sharing and collaborating on the mutable part of the history,
+- share and collaborate on mutable part of the history,
-- gracefully handling history rewriting conflicts,
+- gracefully handle history rewriting conflict,
-- various history rewriting UI’s collaborating with an underlying common API.
+- allows various history rewriting UI to collaborate with a underlying common API.
.. list-table:: Comparison on solution [#]_
:header-rows: 1