On Thursday, December 15, 2011 10:53:20 PM UTC+7, Edward K. Ream wrote: > > On Thu, Dec 15, 2011 at 6:21 AM, HansBKK <[email protected]> wrote: > > > To generalize my scenario further, only using @shadow or @nosent, all > data is in either "A" or "B" trees. > > > > The "master" tree "A" > > - is the only one containing @shadow files > > - there are no clones shared between them > > - only those files will be edited externally > > > > All other locations "B" > > - contain only @nosent files > > - all changes to their content take place within Leo > > This looks safe to me, now that you mention it :-) Please let us know > how it works for you. > > Edward >
Many hundreds of files later, haven't had any problems with this SOP to avoid clone-war data loss. All of the below still applies. If this proves to be a solid solution (after more systematic testing) to > the oft-expressed desire for "multi-file" clones, I recommend that this be > reflected in the @ <file> docs. Note of course it still does not enable > "multi-source" clones. Perhaps call this "single-source multi-target" > cloning? > > Consider this to a somewhat delayed response to this post, and let me know > if it rings any bells: > http://groups.google.com/group/leo-editor/msg/c54658a6ea61d52f > > I believe nothing actually got modified in @sent's logic as a result of > the thinking behind this post? > > The docs somewhat deprecate @nosent, but it seems my use case may restore > them to full-fledged citizens. Note that this only works **because** Leo > can't read from them. > > -------------------- > > At the risk of being a pest, I'd still like to request - no rush, and only > if it's easy - a response to this question: > > >> My suggested rule is this: when putting clones in external files, make > sure the clone appears in at most one external file that does not contain > an @all directive. Leo's new read code gives top priority to clones in > external files not containing @all. The new read code gives lowest priority > to clones in external files that do contain @all. > >Does the above still hold? > > It's not just an academic question, as I am considering other scenarios > where it would be valuable for a snippet in the B tree to be updated > externally. In this case it would be worth sacrificing the control offered > by sections/@others ordering, in order to get true "multi-source" clones. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "leo-editor" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/leo-editor/-/1jIavoqXxLUJ. 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.
