> -----Original Message-----
> From: Philip Martin [mailto:philip_at_codematters.co.uk]
> Sent: vrijdag 10 juni 2011 11:28
> To: dev_at_subversion.apache.org
> Subject: Issue 3908: showing wc directory locks in status
>
> Working copy locks were per-directory in 1.6 and 'svn status' showed 'L'
> to indicate which directories were locked. There is currently a
> behaviour change in 1.7, 'svn status' now only displays 'L' if the
> directory is "interesting" for some other reason, added, prop-mod, etc.
>
> 1.6 clears locks that are not protecting log files, given the chance, so
> after an interrupted operation status would typically show 'L' for just
> the directory that had a log file rather than the whole tree.
Unrelated to your real question:
But i think we should also clear locks now, that are not protecting wq
items.
(We could just clear locks anyway, as wq items are unrelated to locks. But I
think it is better to keep them, to make cleanup obtain the locks when
running the wq items)
Locks are already obtained via a result_pool pattern, so adding automatic
release on pool cleanup shouldn't be hard.
> In 1.7 there is generally only one lock per-tree, so if it is present
> following an interrupted operation, status would probably have to show
> 'L' for every directory in the tree to behave like 1.6. However the
> current behaviour means that status will sometimes show nothing for a
> locked working copy.
>
> Is this behaviour change acceptable? What behaviour do we want?
>
> - the current behaviour, only show 'L' on otherwise interesting
> directories
>
> - the 1.6 behaviour, show 'L' on every locked directory which will often
> be every directory in the tree
>
> - something else
>
> http://subversion.tigris.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3908
Also unrelated:
If there are wq items, we can't show status at all: You can't open the
database when there are wq items left.
Bert
Received on 2011-06-10 11:44:14 CEST