As someone who always considered the Leo file the "source" and the
derived files as "secondary", this is of great importance to me.
RIght now, there are two ways of collaborating on a Leo file:
* cross your fingers and hope no one else makes any changes between
when you retrieve it from the version control system and when you
submit back
* lock it (available with subversion and others), explicitly
preventing anyone else from making changes, until saving the changes
in the VCS unlocks it.
I'm aware of two better approaches, both of which will require
intellectually challenging work:
* provide a means to reconcile conflicts within an XML file in a
visually easy to understand format. A couple years ago, after a
couple hours with Google, I laid my hands on a XML diff program; the
output was a series of XML operations to change one XML file into
another - not humanly meaningful. What I need is a visual
representation of (a) common before state (b) my changes (c) their
changes (d) my reconciliation
* "eventual consistency", e.g., as in Google wave. The current online
GUI provided by Google is barely of interest: what *is* of interest is
their API and its back end.
- Stephen
On Aug 2, 8:55 am, "Edward K. Ream" <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am beginning to feel that something basic is missing from Leo. As
> Ville recently said, it's too hard to share data, especially .leo
> files. Sentinels are not the issue: we would still have the problem
> even if no one were bothered by sentinels.
>
> This problem can not be solved by adding "ordinary" features. And
> deleting clones is also not a solution :-)
>
> This is a good time to confront this issue. The relevant parts of
> Leo's internals are "perfect": we have the simplest possible internal
> data model (the one-node world), and the simplest possible sentinels.
> So it's clear that "ordinary" optimizations will not suffice either.
>
> My unease increased after adding the "Recovered Nodes" feature. They
> shows how often Leo's load process is not as expected.
>
> I don't have a clear idea of the way forward. Something more is
> needed, but I couldn't say what. I suspect that new ideas will
> involve re-imagining how Leo interacts with the larger world.
>
> I'll be adding to this thread from time to time. I encourage any and
> all ideas.
>
> 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.
