Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> One of the next things on my plate is to give users the option to
> resolve conflicts interactively. That is, rather than
> update/switch/merge just marking files as 'conflicted' and then
> letting the user deal with the conflicts later on, the whole process
> can optionally pause on a conflict and have the user interactively
> resolve the problem on the spot.
Great idea. One concern: if I recall correctly, we had to remove the
streaminess from the merge operation as run under ra-dav because the time it
takes to deal with certain merge situations was backing up the network pipe
until Apache killed it. Remember that? The primary merge operation's
REPORT response is squirreled away to a tempfile on disk now, then read back
and played through the editor interface as if it was "live".
Anyway, if we add interactivity of this sort (which means "potentially
infinite pausing") I suspect we'll run into the same situations for even
common update operations. The solution to this might mean exposing the
to-be-streamy-or-not-to-be-streamy flag to callers of the RA layers (even
though Apache is the only server that has the issue, svnserve doens't seem to).
C. Michael Pilato <firstname.lastname@example.org>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Received on Fri Jun 8 17:25:31 2007