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

RE: Re: Atomicity of locks and needs-lock

From: Edward Harvey <eharvey_at_chilsemi.com>
Date: 2006-05-03 00:47:37 CEST

> As such, making this type of behavior (auto-needs-lock) just
> adds a "feature"

Even though the subject still says "atomicity of locks and needs-lock,"
I think this thread has gone a different direction --

When I first posted the original question, it was almost immediately
clear that there should be no atomicity of lock & needs-lock together.

Instead, the subject mutated into this --

Change #1 - Cache the most recently known lock status in the entries

Change #2 - Optional. User-configurable. Disabled by default.
If the most recent update said a file was locked by some other user,
        (a) change the icon to gray,
        (b) set the read-only bit
just the same as it does when a file has needs-lock property on it.

Change #3 - Way off in the future, allow the "status" command to update
the local cached info about locks, rather than depending exclusively on
"update" to store the lock status in the working copy.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Wed May 3 00:48:02 2006

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