[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: svn commit: r13308 - branches/locking/subversion/libsvn_fs_base

From: Ben Collins-Sussman <sussman_at_collab.net>
Date: 2005-03-08 22:00:39 CET

On Mar 8, 2005, at 2:48 PM, Philip Martin wrote:
> Scenario 1
> working copy A: create directory 'foo'
> lock 'foo/bar'
> working copy B: create directory 'foo'
> commit 'foo' => fails because 'foo/bar' is locked
> Scenario 2
> working copy A: create directory 'foo'
> lock 'foo/bar'
> working copy B: create file 'foo'
> commit 'foo' => succeeds
> I don't think it's sensible for one of those commits to succeed and
> one to fail.

At the moment, the client has zero support for locking nonexistent
paths; it doesn't even allow locking of URLs yet.

But your scenarios still make sense to me: replace your "working copy
A" text with "random DAV client", and they're quite possible.

So Mike, maybe we need to do both the non-recursive and recursive
checks for deleted *and* added objects.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Mar 8 22:02:12 2005

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.