On Thu, 16 Dec 2004, Julian Foad wrote:
> Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> > On Dec 16, 2004, at 11:50 AM, Peter N. Lundblad wrote:
> >> Do people agree that we unlock by default and don't on --keep-locked
> >> switch? I'll assume so if I don't get massive objections:-)
> >
> > That certainly seems to be the consensus.
>
> As usual, I'll recommend providing explicit switches for both ways, so that the
> default need not be finalised in the first release that supports locking.
> After one release worth of experience, we may have a better idea of what the
> default should be, or whether the default should be configurable.
>
How would you do without a default? Error out if a any lock is discovered?
If we want to add an option for the oposite later, or add it to the
configuration files, we might want to use --no-unlock (so we can add
--unlock). Opinions?
Regards,
//Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Dec 16 21:51:20 2004