Johan:
The "svn lock" enables all people considering working with a file to
be able to see who currently has the file locked. But they cannot see
anyone who is working on the file but does not own the lock.
Reading the "p4 edit" man page:
https://www.perforce.com/perforce/r16.1/manuals/cmdref/p4_edit.html
we see that the expected use is "p4 edit; <edit file>; p4 submit" and that
"p4 edit" updates the Perforce database to mark the file as being edited
by that account in that workspace. That means that any other Perforce
user can see *all* of the other accounts working on that file (this is *not*
the same as a lock) by issuing the "p4 opened -a file" command.
The ClearCase Dynamic View situation is pretty much the same as what
I have described above for Perforce.
Doug
On Sun, Jun 12, 2016 at 4:48 PM, Johan Corveleyn <jcorvel_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> [ Please no top-posting on this list. Preferably put your reply inline
> or at the bottom. I've reshuffled your replies a bit. More below. ]
>
> >> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 8:15 PM, Doug Robinson <
> doug.robinson_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> The dichotomy is due to the expression of "knowing who is actually
> working on a file".
> >>>
> >>> I agree that if locking is used then (assuming nobody breaks the lock)
> you know who will checkin next. And, yes, agreed, when they check in is a
> social issue.
> >>>
> >>> However, you really don't know who is working on the file. This may
> all seem meta-physical but I've seen requirements for SCM systems where it
> really was necessary to know exactly who was actually working on the file
> in their sandbox. None of the discussed SCMs here support those semantics.
> >>>
> > On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 4:36 PM, Mark McKeown <mark.mckeown_at_wandisco.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Doug,
> >> So if I remember correctly p4 supports this, when you
> "p4 edit" a file it will tell you if anyone else has already done "p4 edit"
> on the file.
> >>
> >> cheers
> >> Mark
> >>
> On Fri, Jun 10, 2016 at 10:42 PM, Doug Robinson
> <doug.robinson_at_wandisco.com> wrote:
> >
> > Mark:
> >
> > Nice. And ClearCase with Dynamic Views as Brane reminded me.
> >
> > Doug
>
> I fail to see the difference between "p4 edit" and "svn lock" (or your
> IDE invoking "svn lock" automatically when you start editing a file
> marked with svn:needs-lock). Can someone explain?
>
> I don't know Perforce, but from an "information transfer" point of
> view it sounds the same to me.
>
> If a developer has a file locked in SVN (indicated by a lock token
> noted on the server), I suppose they have the intention to edit, and
> commit sometime later. I'm guessing p4 also holds some lock token
> centrally when someone has 'p4 edit'ed the file (which sounds like an
> intention to edit the file), until the developer commits. Tomatoes,
> tomatoes ...
>
> (I know even less about ClearCase Dynamic Views than I know about
> Perforce, so I won't try to guess what that does ...)
>
> --
> Johan
>
--
*DOUGLAS B. ROBINSON* SENIOR PRODUCT MANAGER
*T *925-396-1125
*E* doug.robinson_at_wandisco.com
*www.wandisco.com <http://www.wandisco.com/>*
--
Learn how WANdisco Fusion solves Hadoop data protection and scalability
challenges <http://www.wandisco.com/hadoop/wd-fusion>
Listed on the London Stock Exchange: WAND
<http://www.bloomberg.com/quote/WAND:LN>
THIS MESSAGE AND ANY ATTACHMENTS ARE CONFIDENTIAL, PROPRIETARY, AND MAY BE
PRIVILEGED. If this message was misdirected, WANdisco, Inc. and its
subsidiaries, ("WANdisco") does not waive any confidentiality or privilege.
If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately and
destroy the message without disclosing its contents to anyone. Any
distribution, use or copying of this e-mail or the information it contains
by other than an intended recipient is unauthorized. The views and
opinions expressed in this e-mail message are the author's own and may not
reflect the views and opinions of WANdisco, unless the author is authorized
by WANdisco to express such views or opinions on its behalf. All email
sent to or from this address is subject to electronic storage and review by
WANdisco. Although WANdisco operates anti-virus programs, it does not
accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever caused by viruses being
passed.
Received on 2016-06-13 17:29:35 CEST