Stefan Sperling <stsp_at_elego.de> wrote on 07/14/2011 08:40:29 AM:
> On Thu, Jul 14, 2011 at 08:17:07AM -0500, kmradke_at_rockwellcollins.com
wrote:
> > Julian Foad <julian.foad_at_wandisco.com> wrote on 07/14/2011 06:58:24
AM:
> > > The attached patch makes some improvements to how we report that the
WC
> > > is locked or busy (the 'run cleanup' messages). I need a sanity
check
> > > to make sure I've understood the relationship between how we want to
> > > handle 'the work queue is busy' and 'there is a write lock on a WC
> > > directory'.
> >
> > I'm all for removing the overloaded "lock" terminology. We see a lot
> > of confused users who think they somehow incorrectly locked a file
> > in the repository when they see the old messages...
>
> I agree. It should say something like "the working copy is busy"
instead.
> ("busy" because it not used elsewhere, and because it will be
> understood even by non-technical users who don't know what a lock is
> supposed to be in this context).
Not that I can vote, but using "busy" instead of "lock" gets my +1...
Kevin R.
Received on 2011-07-14 16:01:22 CEST