From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-Id: <3.0.5.32.20011128232123.018d8310@mail.real.com>
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
From: Skip Tavakkolian <skipt@real.com>
Subject: Re: [9fans] Python filesystem
In-Reply-To: <20011129074900.F317@cackle.proxima.alt.za>
References: <200111281909.fASJ9xT58241@devil.lucid>
 <20011128185430.958E519A33@mail.cse.psu.edu>
 <200111281909.fASJ9xT58241@devil.lucid>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2001 23:21:23 -0800
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 2c68dcca-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

CVS or a derivative thereof, should be a filesystem. It seems to me that
something like ftpfs is very close to what a CVS fs could be. Assuming a
pserver is managing the sources, the cvsfs connects and shows the user the
source repository.  The user can copy files out of and into of the
filesystem (causing checkouts and checkins).  I think starting very simple
(just checkins and checkouts) would still be very useful.

At 07:49 AM 11/29/2001 +0200, Lucio De Re wrote:
>On Wed, Nov 28, 2001 at 07:09:58PM +0000, Matt wrote:
>>
>> I'm surprised more of the command line tools aren't daemonised actually.
>>
>My thinking (just to show how muddled one can get) was to turn
>environments into shells, instead.  Take CVS, for example:
>
>cvs login
>cvs co
>cvs update
>etc.
>
>I'd have a CVS shell accepting all sort of commands:
>
>% CVS
>cvs> login
>cvs> co
>...
>
>where the commands are scripts and executables built into the shell (or
>not, as one sees fit) and bound to /bin (the traditional home for them)
>in as restricted a namespace as one finds necessary.
>
>Very, very vague, I fear.
>
>++L
>
>