Re: [OT] Conflict, an open source project

On 8/2/07, Dennis Byrne <dennisbyrne@apache.org> wrote:

> I see this as an alternative to locking. In my experience, it is not as
> used as much as some of the other great features in subversion. Also, it's
> my understanding that you will not know about the lock until it is time to
> commit your changes.

Actually, no, that's not the case at all. If you put the
'svn:needs-lock' property on a file, then it becomes read-only in
everyone's working copy, and only becomes read-write when you 'svn
lock' it. Thus, you discover pre-existing locks *before* you even
begin to edit the file.

Regarding your conflict-server idea: perforce solves the problem by
keeping *all* working copy files as read-only. You need to 'p4 edit'
a file to make it read-write, at which point the server then keeps
track of exactly which files you're editing. You can ask the server
(at any point) who is working on a file.

A number of people have requested a similar mode of operation for
subversion, since it would solve the same problem your conflict-server
does.

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Thu Aug 2 15:46:58 2007