Thank you Clint,
But may be you can help me to know what I must understand in :
"If the lock database is not propogated, users will not be able to
accurately determine whether a lock is held — but locking will still work."
So does locking mecanism work or not ? Because I don't care about knowing
who has a lock on one file or another with svnstatus, I just want that when
someone has locked a file then anybody who try to lock again this file wille
face to a refusal.
And anyway, I don't understand how it's possible, in my local case, that a
user locks a file on the slave server and only on the slave server whereas
all the write-oriented activities are supposed to be done on the master
server.
I would be very grateful to anyone for any additional explication.
Adrien
2008/7/4 Clint Lawrence <clint.lawrence_at_gmail.com>:
> 2008/7/4 Adrien <hannibalbundy_at_gmail.com>:
> > Can anybody please validate or invalidate this behavior ? I just want to
> > know if it's possible or not to use the lock/unlock feature with write
> > through proxing. Don't hesitate to tell me if my post is not clear, I
> will
> > try to rephrase it.
> >
> > Adrien
> >
> > 2008/7/2 Adrien <hannibalbundy_at_gmail.com>:
> >>
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I haven't well understood the svn book about this topic so I just want
> to
> >> know if it's normal that when we lock a file from a working copy in sync
> >> with a slave server, this lock was effective on the slave server and not
> on
> >> the master server. Actually, it seemed to me that all locks operations
> would
> >> be done on the master server to offer the support of the lock
> functionnality
> >> with write through proxying.
> >>
> >> Thanks in advance,
> >> Adrien
> This might help answer your question.
> http://subversion.tigris.org/svn_1.5_releasenotes.html#webdav-proxy
>
> Cheers,
> Clint
>
Received on 2008-07-04 14:38:21 CEST