On Sun, Jan 24, 2010 at 3:14 PM, Gil Shwartz <[email protected]> wrote: > Multi Source Clones > > This is the difficult case, which is typically associated with the > second use case “clones for synchronization”.
And this is the case I would like to discourage. I have no commitment whatever to making this case work reliably, now or ever. > The problem with “multi source clone” is > obvious – multiple clone nodes may be changed outside of Leo, causing > clone sync to break without an automagical method to fit and fix all > scenarios. Exactly. And if the "last clone wins" rule doesn't work, you are in trouble of your own making. Leo can not and will not help you out, other than to say that a node has unexpected changed. At present, this warning is given in red. > To summarize, the following are useful options for the user to have: > a. De-clone this clone node (making it a regular node and keeping its > content version x). > b. Split-clone all clone content version x nodes (keeping them as > clones with content version x). > c. Re-sync this clone node with clone content version y (replacing > this node x by y). > d. Re-sync all clone content version x nodes with clone content > version y (replacing all x by y). > e. Re-sync all clone content version y nodes with this clone content > (replacing all y by x). > > It may sound confusing at first, but simply put it is: turn A to B and > get rid of A (or vice versa), keep A and B separate, or just handle > this particular node. Imo, these kinds of complexities are an indication that one is trying to solve the wrong problem. Edward -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor?hl=en.
