On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 07:46:05PM -0500, kfogel@collab.net wrote:
> Chia-liang Kao <clkao@clkao.org> writes:
> > > I actually disagree that this would require lots of new code. Also,
> > > it does not require updating the uncommitted txn with merges -- that's
> > > a further enhancement, not a necessity for the basic feature.
> >
> > That means any other non-conflicting commit actually got committed would
> > render the txn unapplicable, which you will naturely do a merge and
> > regenerate the txn. Since you have to do that, I think software should
> > probably do it for you.
>
> Sorry, I'm not sure I understand.
>
> If commits come in later, but are non-conflicting with the dangling
> txn, then the dangling txn can still be committed at any time. Why
> would it be rendered in applicable?
It can commit if it's node-level non-conflicting. But I was talking
about textually non-conflicting.
Cheers,
CLK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Tue Aug 23 10:42:31 2005