[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: [Issue 533] New - implement reserved checkouts

From: Eric W. Sink <eric_at_sourcegear.com>
Date: 2002-08-05 16:59:10 CEST

> > I think you still have a tricky decision on *if* you should
> > include locks at all. It seemed clear to me that a compelling
> > replacement for SourceSafe must have them, but it's not clear
> > that compelling replacement for CVS should have them as well.
> > Were Greg's "Excel use case" not so clearly valid, I would
> > assert that they just don't belong in Subversion.
> >
> I don't agree at all. I chose Subversion specifically because I felt it was a
> good choice for this type of file.

Clarification: My last sentence above leaves the word "they" a
bit ambiguous. The sentence could be rewritten as follows:

> Were Greg's "Excel use case" not so clearly valid, I would
> assert that locks just don't belong in Subversion.

Clarifying further: I was not taking a firm stance on whether
locks should go in Subversion 1.0, and I rather doubt my opinion
would matter much if I did. I was merely noticing that the decision
is a tough one, by emphasizing that:

    1. Most of your target user base probably does *not*
        expect locks, because they use CVS.

    2. But one of your own core developers (Greg) really
        wants them because he wants to version control a
        big non-mergable file.

So when you (Glenn) say that you "don't agree at all", I'm not
sure exactly what you are disagreeing with, but it looks possible
that it wasn't something I was trying to assert. :-)

Sorry if my wording was unclear.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Aug 5 17:00:05 2002

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.