2011/10/19 Lluís Batlle i Rossell <virik...@gmail.com> > Well, the tags name or value could have the file name. >
That's an idea. But we would also need the branch, wouldn't we? Or does the tag follow the branch? > Maybe, instead of tags, there could be a list like the versionable > 'glob-ignore', of files that require locks. Those could be checked out with > read-only permissions. > That sounds reasonably simple to implement and is probably flexible enough to handle most cases (where people have either a few binary files of different types or large collections which all match a wildcard or two). > That could even help even before fossil having a capability of > centraliising > locks; the read-only permissions could be enough for the people in a team > to > decide on the locks. > Can we do read-only cross-platform (i.e. Windows)? But the needs-lock tag also has the sync problem - the tag would need to be in place before the checkout. And update would be more complicated because fossil would have to temporarily overwrite (and potentially revert) the permissions in order to perform an update. Hmmm. -- ----- stephan beal http://wanderinghorse.net/home/stephan/
_______________________________________________ fossil-users mailing list fossil-users@lists.fossil-scm.org http://lists.fossil-scm.org:8080/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fossil-users
