Re: Locking server implementation: libsvn_repos or libsvn_fs

On Oct 29, 2004, at 4:17 PM, Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:

> It seems like most of the smaller issues have dropped out of this
> thread. Allow me to oversimplify.
>
> * The remaining 'big' argument for locks-in-fs is "it's more
> convenient for
> callers."
>
> * The remaining big argument for locks-in-repos is "it's easier to
> implement".

Sorry to jump in so late here, but I haven't seen anyone bring up
gstein's big argument against locks-in-repos, namely that programs that
directly access the fs will circumvent any locks that are in-place
(e.g. SubWiki).

For the most part, I think I prefer locks-in-repos, but I just wanted
to air this one argument since I haven't seen it mentioned yet.

-Fitz

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Nov 2 17:46:15 2004