Oooooh. Now I see what you mean.
Let me sleep on this; mmm, hmmm, mrngl, zzzz. Good point you raise.
It could be gotten around by some client-side record-keeping, without
changing the editor interface, but is that the best way? Must
incubate this question.
(Thanks for explaining twice, Greg.)
Greg Stein <email@example.com> writes:
> When you're talking about what to copy from, yes... they are inseparable.
> However, Karl specifically said that we also want to know the revision that
> we are attempting to update. In short he said:
> 1) crawl is performed, we find foo.c is at rev 6
> 2) [begin time-consuming task]
> a) send info (foo.c / 6) to server
> b) server says: you'll need to update foo.c to v7
> c) client asks for diff between 6 and 7 for foo.c
> d) client applies the diff
> 3) while (2) is occuring, something goes and updates foo.c from 6 to 7.
> Result: double application of the 6/7 diff to foo.c
> My posts were about the fact that we need the old revision number when we go
> to make some kind of change to the WC. Every change must be applied with the
> assumption that it is operating against revision OLD-REV.
> The current editor interface doesn't deal with the double revnum issue.
> Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:17 2006