Ah, thank you. Now I understand. And it looks to me like a big headache waiting to happen. Relying on people following "intentions" of the software is not very robust.
On 10/19/2011 02:55 PM, Lluís Batlle i Rossell wrote: > On Wed, Oct 19, 2011 at 02:52:41PM +0200, Ron Aaron wrote: >> And furthermore, how exactly do "locks" work in a distributed SCM >> context? (that was my 2 NIS) > http://veracity-scm.com/qa/questions/102/why-would-you-design-a-dvcs-in-2011-that-supports-file-locks-dvcs-are-meant-to-make-it-needless-to-worry-about-that > > I think that the veracity documentation totally deludes. :) But it may be > intended, as it's a product of sourcegear. Eric wrote a book about it... and > his > message is (I think) "buy the book". > >> On 10/19/2011 02:50 PM, Stephan Beal wrote: >>> My 0.02€: in some 16 years of using source control, i have never once >>> had a use for (and sometimes been hindered by) locks. IMO anyone who >>> _thinks_ they need them is still living in the 1980's or early 1990's. >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> fossil-users mailing list >> fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org >> http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users > _______________________________________________ > fossil-users mailing list > fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org > http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users _______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
