Re: Locking consensus(es) so far

--On Wednesday, October 13, 2004 5:58 PM -0400 Ben Collins-Sussman
<sussman@red-bean.com> wrote:

> So, why would a group of people uninterested in Dreamweaver start editing
> those files, or even care if they're locked at any given time? :-)

I'm assuming you're being sarcastic here. ;-)

> And beyond that, assuming Dreamweaver files are unmergeable, doesn't it
> make sense for the admin to set 'svn:needs-lock' on them anyway? That
> way, even when the Dreamweaver folks aren't using Dreamweaver, they're
> less likely to accidentally change the file contents.
>
> What's the problem here?

As you phrase it, none. However, the Dreamweaver files are certainly
mergeable: they are just plain HTML files. I'm not clear why there is an
insistence on having 'svn:needs-lock' (did we settle on that now?) for only
unmergeable files: hence my confusion and proffer of this particular use
case. FWIW, your comment that I was responding to was:

> If the file were mergeable, why did the admin put an 'svn:needs-lock'
> property on it? ;-)

In this context, in order for a non-Dreamweaver-user to play well with the
other Dreamweaver folks, Subversion clients should be respecting the
'svn:needs-lock' parameter even though the files are plain text. And, this
is exactly the scenario (A) that you thought wasn't very likely; but is
modus operandi with a mix of Dreamweaver and Subversion clients. -- justin

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Oct 14 00:10:10 2004