Re: Exclusive Locking: design in a nutshell

Mark Phippard <MarkP@softlanding.com> writes:

> I believe John is referring to the way that was originally proposed where
> a PUT would be visible to people doing a GET of HEAD without having
> commited that PUT until some other command came along later to commit it.
> In that scenario, if the user cancelled the lock and never "committed"
> then people would have been retrieving something from HEAD that is now not
> referenced in the repository in any manner. It would be like it never
> existed, hence the inconsistent views.
>
> This is solved by the later proposal to cause PUT to always commit.

Ah yes, and is to this later proposal that I was speaking. Thanks for
the clarification.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu May 20 22:09:12 2004