Garrett Rooney <rooneg@electricjellyfish.net> writes:
> >i thought about the next command running cleanup, if this is the only
> >thing you can do to solve the problem.
>
> doesn't that defeat the purpose of having locks? we locked the
> working copy for a reason, and just because you ran into a lock that
> this instance of svn didn't put there doesn't mean it isn't a valid
> lock (some other svn client might be locking that directory). i was
> under the impression that svn cleanup just breaks the locks and runs
> any existing logs, whihc doesn't seem to be the right thing to do if
> we don't 'know' that the locks are indeed invalid. unfortunately, we
> can't know that they are invalid, only the user can.
Yeah, exactly -- the point is that a human decision needs to intervene
here. If the human says that there's no Subversion operation going on
in this working copy, then fine, Subversion can steal its own locks.
But Subversion can't make that decision itself.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Jan 9 20:10:39 2003