Re: file:// + exclusive locking/external locking - what's right?

"Files" <files@poetryunlimited.com> writes:
> Maybe if we separated it out in terms of those two concerns and then decided
> what would be useful to keep and not keep when faced with concurrency issues
> across a networked filesystem w/o a server?
>
> What's the right answer here?

I think our reactions are more about "Let's not add this complexity so
close to 1.0, let's revisit the issue afterwards" than anything else.
At least, that's my motivation.

> Ignoring networked filesystems because they have to use a server implies that
> we shouldn't even have the file:// protocol, since it should all be
> client-server.
>
> Shouldn't it?

Well, the file:// protocol is useful for testing whether a given
behavior is independent of a network layer or not. We do this all the
time.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Nov 5 05:53:38 2003