Re: Disarchive database synchronization

[Simon Tournier <zimon.toutoune@gmail.com>]

Hi,

On sam., 18 mars 2023 at 13:49, Timothy Sample <samplet@ngyro.com> wrote:

>>               (input (directory-ref
>>                        (version 0)
>> -                      (name "webview-sys-0.6.2")
>> +                      (name "rust-webview-sys-0.6.2")

[...]

>> As Tim pointed out, Disarchive disassembly is not fully deterministic
>> and/or might change a bit over time as Disarchive evolves, and that’s
>> prolly what we’re seeing here.
>
> I honestly think this is a good thing.  My instincts tell me that we
> should excise all sources of ambiguity, like we’re trying to do in the
> big picture.  However, Disarchive will get better at describing things
> over time.  For instance, it doesn’t handle tar extension headers
> elegantly at the moment.  In the future, if I fix this, I might consider
> creating a “migrate” feature that improves existing specifications
> (e.g., converting the old, verbose representation of extension headers
> into the new representation).  In particular, I’ve left some warts in
> the software in order to ship it, and I would be sad to try and commit
> to those for the rest of time!

How do we know that this “disarchive disassemble” will work with that
“disarchive assemble”?  Is it tracked by the ’version’ field above?

Well, “disarchive disassemble” output a specification and the format of
this specification can change for various improvements.  However, this
specification format should be clearly specified and for one version of
that specification, the output must be deterministic.  Or I am missing a
point.

Cheers,
simon