Re: Adding a no-op LOCK to mod_dav_svn

On Fri, Jan 03, 2003 at 04:00:07PM -0800, Daniel Rall wrote:
> On 3 Jan 2003, Greg Hudson wrote:
>...
> > The tragedy is not that the clients don't have locking, but that we're
> > lying to them. If some clients are overly paranoid (do they actually
> > get anything out of obtaining a lock?), then that's sad, but we
> > shouldn't escalate by claiming to support a protocol feature we don't
> > implement.
> >
> > I'm a strong -0 on this idea, very close to a -1.

Right. Same here. Call me -0.95 :-)

> How about starting off with no-op "locking" in a branch, which those
> desiring a lying mod_dav_svn could use now, and that those interested in
> implementing locking could later take as a starting point and run with?

I'd say no way. We're already seeing problems with people reporting issues
with cvs2svn and the first question is "are you using the branch version?"
Branches should be for developers to create functionality, not users.

Cheers,
-g

-- 
Greg Stein, http://www.lyra.org/
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org