Justin Erenkrantz <justin@erenkrantz.com> wrote on 10/13/2004 03:26:58 PM:
> --On Wednesday, October 13, 2004 1:06 PM +0100 Julian Foad
> <julianfoad@btopenworld.com> wrote:
>
> > Certainly not. The "svn:lock" property was proposed as a permanent
> > indication that this is a file that ought to be locked before working
on it,
> > not as the indication that it is currently locked.
>
> The problem is that according to WebDAV, we have to respond to the
> lockdiscovery property on the resource in order to allow a query if
there's an
> outstanding lock. (This is what 'svn info' should do in order to query
lock
> info.) So, the question remains: does an implicit change of a live
property
> imply a change in our revnum? I could see it going either way. --
justin
Forgive me if I am being dense, but what would the implicit change be? I
thought that svn:lock was just a normal property that would be set and
managed like any other property. In other words, it would only ever be
set/modified/removed explicitly and would up the revnum when committed.
There has been a lot of conversation, so perhaps I have missed something?
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Oct 13 22:18:11 2004