Re: Aha! How to have file locking without file locking.

On Thu, Apr 04, 2002 at 06:16:39PM -0600, Karl Fogel wrote:
> [Warning: this is a blue-sky, post-1.0 plan. If you only
> want to read about immediately important stuff, stop now.]
>
> Just had an idea for how to get the advantages of file locking without
> having to implement file locking. More accurately, call it an answer
> to cvs watch/edit, but without all the the pain for the user.

I see a few problems with the watchd idea. Consider this:

I checkout a copy of the repo. I apply a patch I want to test. Watchd is
started, and communicates this to the repo. I later reboot or whatever,
and then kill off the test checkout I had, since I wasn't really
interested in it anyway.

Stale "locks" occur.

While I can appreciate the extra help of checking for conflicting
changes, IMO, we only really need a "being edited" state. Anything else
is a bit of overkill. In all honesty, I like the way perforce will only
checkin files that are marked "edit", "add" or "remove". It forces
people to mark files as being edited. Having some lurking daemon that
tracks all your moves just seems like a really bad idea (sorry, it
sounds good, but a daemon just leaves a bad taste in my mouth).
Especially given some of the repos I am working with (> 8000 files).

Ben

-- 
Debian     - http://www.debian.org/
Linux 1394 - http://linux1394.sourceforge.net/
Subversion - http://subversion.tigris.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org