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.
Tony, To be honest there are no technical reasons to lock files exclusively with CVS, not even the binary ones. However I do admit that it may help if the binary files are treated with a little extra care. And that is why I always supported the "edit -c" approach - it provides a perfect balance between the need for concurency and the need to synchronize any work on non-mergable files. It allows to override the lock and it makes sure that the decision to do so is concious. At the same time the server-side support allows to enforce the editing policy making the system work in consitent and predictable way. Now, on the psychological level, it's just a matter of carefully chosen wording. With the server-side cvsrc you can make "edit -c" and "commit -c" compulsory and effectively you get the "exclusive" edits but in a civilised, concurent way. It can be overriden by using commit -f and so it avoids all the problems caused by typical exclusive locking. It's a great advantage and it should be exploited rather than adding new and completely unneccesary option to the edit command that effectively turns CVS into un-concurent versions system. On a side note, it appears from your comments that the decision to add the exclusive edits is driven by the CVSNT going "commercial". It's very sad to see that going the wrong way so soon :( Best Regards, Jerzy ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Hoyle" <tmh at nodomain.org> Newsgroups: support.cvsnt To: <cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook> Sent: Sunday, October 03, 2004 20:07 Subject: Re: [cvsnt] Re: Why edit -x? > Jerzy Kaczorowski wrote: > > Tony, > > > > Right, binary files. But with the edit -x the cure is worse that the > > disease. > > > > Why not limit the exclusive edits to binary files only? > > > Why impose arbitrary limits like that? There's no technical reason for it. > > Like it or not, some people *will* want to use exclusive edits, no > matter how much we try to persuade them otherwise. I'd rather they were > able to use cvsnt (then start using proper concurrency when they realize > the problems) than buy another package that only supports exclusive > edits, then they're stuck... which really sucks if the only reason for > wanting exclusive edits is because some upper level management type > thinks they're cool. > > Tony > _______________________________________________ > cvsnt mailing list > cvsnt at cvsnt.org cvsnt downloads at march-hare.com @CVSNT on Twitter CVSNT on Facebook > http://www.cvsnt.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cvsnt https://www.march-hare.com/cvspro/en.asp#downcvs >