On Thu, 2004-10-14 at 10:15, Julian Foad wrote:
> Sander Striker wrote:
> > Seriously, the user group you are now standing up for is much more
> > likely to use a GUI than to use the cmdline client. I'd like to see
> > us try to keep the cmdline client consistent and would propose that
> > we generate a 'regular' conflict. GUIs can solve this issue in their
> > own way (the API should allow for detecting if a conflict was
> > generated because of a hijacked lock).
> I agree. If someone has deliberately circumvented the lock
> communication mechanism then it is reasonable for them to expect to have
> to take some more (initially unfamiliar) action when they come to commit
> the file. If they got into the situation accidentally, not knowing that
> the tools they used circumvented the read-only protection, then it is
> well and good that they should have to pause at this stage and read up
> or ask for help.
Hang on a second. I don't think we're talking about people who are
deliberately circumventing the lock communication mechanism. Rather,
people who have tools that ignore the write permissions of a file when
they open it for editing. We shouldn't punish users for this--they
frequently don't have a choice in the tools that they use.
> Seeing some extra files appear and having to run "svn resolved" is not
> such a frightening thing for even a non-techie user to digest if they
> have already been using the command-line "svn update" and "svn commit"
> etc. In my experience, non-techies learn to take a patient approach to
> using computer software. When anything unfamiliar occurs they are
> usually happy to seek help, whether on-line or off-line.
Oh man do you lead a charmed life. :-) In my experience when non-techies
encounter *anything* unusual in a computer application, they tend to
completely freak out and go running to the nearest techie in atavistic
> If instead
> they try to blunder on, at least this way they have to take a conscious
> action rather than just seeing a warning and thinking, "Oh, well, there
> was some sort of warning but nevertheless the operation seems to have
> worked so I'll just carry on."
I'm afraid that this isn't the way that most people will take it.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: email@example.com
For additional commands, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
Received on Thu Oct 14 21:09:24 2004