Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> You can't envision a scenario of a team using svnserve, using locks,
> and appreciating a lock-expiration feature?
>
> Sure, the idea of lock-expiration was originally motivated by the DAV
> spec and MS Word DAV clients, but that doesn't mean it's automatically
> some crazy HTTP-specific feature being ickily shoehorned into
> Subversion. It seems like a useful feature to me, even if mod_dav_svn
> didn't exist.
No, I can't envision such a scenario. The DAV locking feature was not
designed with version control in mind. IMHO, in version control, lock
expiration is evil, because if you've locked and changed a file, you
_don't_ want your lock to expire before committing. Sure, there are
situations where explicitly breaking a lock is necessary; but I can't
see how it makes sense to do that automatically.
Supporting lock expiration in the DAV layer is necessary; I definitely
do _not_ want to support it in other layers. If supporting it for DAV
means that the lock timeout must somehow be recorded in the repository,
that's marginally acceptable. But I'd probably veto adding such knobs to
the UI or the RA layers at this point; it's unhygienic.
*If* it turns out someday that lock expiration is a useful feature in
general, then sure, we can add support for that in the RA interface. But
I'd have to see much stronger arguments in favour of it than I've seen
to date.
-- Brane
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed Oct 20 04:22:44 2004