Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
irodriguez perez wrote: > With cvsnt we can do a reserved edit (cvs edit -c). So if we use it > we have the next scenario: > > 1.-cvs edit -c file1.txt. (Only edit file1.txt if anyone has editted > it too) That was probably a typo? You could only edit -c a file if *noone* else is editing it. > 2.-modify file1.txt. > 3.-cvs commit -c file1.txt. > > And file1.txt is automatically uneditted (and read-only). > > If we do a cvs edit without -c option. > > 1.-cvs edit file1.txt. (Edit file1.txt althought another user has > done a reserved edit). > 2.-modify file1.txt. > 3.-cvs commit -c file1.txt. > > And file1.txt can't be uneditted (the file is writeable), but if we > change it and try a commit -c the command fails (that's ok) saying > that the user is not a valid editor. The only way to do it > unwriteable with cvs unedit command is to do a cvs edit again and a > then do a cvs unedit. If that's what's happening for you it is either a bug or you haven't checked out the file read-only in the first place. After the commit the file should be read-only and unedited (i.e. you no longer get reported by cvs editors) again. > Well, if i want edit a file, i can do cvs edit and cvs edit -c, but, > what happens if i want edit a file with 2 conditions?: > > 1.-I don't want edit file1.txt if another user has done a reserved > edit on it. > 2.-I want allow to other users edit the file at the same > time i am editing it, i don't want to do a reserved edit, i want to > do an unreserved edit. > > I can't do cvs edit because condition 1 fails. > I can't do cvs edit -c because condition 2 fails. > > Is there some way to do it? If there is another way please say me, > but i haven't could find it. > > I propose a new edit option. For example -u. With this option if > another user has editted the file with a reserved edit i couldn't > edit it. But if anyone has done a reserved edit on the file i can > edit it. If another user use edit -u, after i used it, he can edit > the file. AFAIK CVS(NT) does currently keep no record of how a file was edited (reserved or not) so taking the edit mode into account would probably require quite fundamental changes... > Of course, reserved edit should change, if a user wants to do a > reserved edit on a file, but the file has been editted with -u option > the command shall fail. Reserved edit will already fail if the file is edited in /any/ way. As I said, to my knowledge, CVS(NT) has no idea in what mode a file is being edited. It only knows /that/ it is edited. The -c stands for "_c_heck editors" - nothing more really. In the case of edit -c it checks whether there are /any/ editors and if so aborts. In the case of commit -c it checks if /I/ am one of the listed editors and aborts otherwise. > A normal scenario for this is: > > 1.-cvs edit -u file1.txt. (Only edit file1.txt if anyone has done a > reserved edit on file1.txt Again, you probably meant *noone* instead of /anyone/, didn't you? > Well, i don't know if somebody can find it useful, but i think it can > do the reserved and unreserved checkouts in cvsnt clearer than now. I don't think so. It's already rather confusing with the two existing modes IMO. I don't think it will get any better by introducing a third one and furthermore complicate the inner logic of the other two even more. Cheers, -- Oliver ---- ------------------ JID: ogiesen at jabber.org ICQ: 18777742 (http://wwp.icq.com/18777742)