On Thursday, January 12, 2012 7:29:51 PM UTC+7, Juraj wrote:
>
> On 12. Jan, 01:37 h., HansBKK <[email protected]> wrote: 
>
> > I've been using them with plain text-as-text files and haven't come 
> across 
> > issues, but also haven't done any systematic testing. I also have the 
> extra 
> > "security blanket" that I make sure any files I'm manipulating with Leo 
> are 
> > under version control, as I'm very aware that my limited understanding 
> of 
> > Leo is a lot more likely to lead to data loss than any bugs. 
>
> If the data loss is accompanied by unresponsive interface, missing 
> menus, exceptions and inopenable Leo files... then I doubt it is 
> caused just by my "limited understanding"... 
>
 
Juraj, I was **only** referring to my limited understanding and my own lack 
of experience, not implying anything about yours.
 

> > Further up in that thread I also point to a different SOP the developer 
> > pointed out in the past to try also. I'd appreciate any feedback you 
> might 
> > have on these as a method to avoid problems with safely keeping nodes in 
> > multiple @files, in case that's one of your needs as well, as that's 
> > generally considered dangerous. 
>
> To this moment I was not aware at all there is such thing as "standard 
> operating procedure"... and even if it would be right in leo's 
> official docs, good luck to have all new users read and follow it :-) 
>

I've been trying to create SOP documentation **for myself**, and soliciting 
feedback from others so that could possibly be included in future 
documentation.

Bottom line if you really want to be safe from clone conflict data loss is 
"don't allow a clone to be included in more than one @ <file> or any type." 
I think this should be well-documented (are clone conflicts even mentioned 
ATM?), and it sounds like we both think should actually be enforced by 
default - Leo can't protect users from all scenarios, but IMO should do so 
for known ones. Apparently the recent changes have to do with something 
along those lines?

I have found what I believe to be a safe way (personal SOP)to accomplish 
safe "multiple @file clones", which is "don't allow a clone to be included 
in more than one @ <file> that imports, e.g. one @shadow; all others should 
be e.g. @nosent".

Edwards' posting outlines an SOP that he follows which is based on the 
relative priority given to @all vs @others, and ordering in the tree.

However all of these areas of using Leo are clearly fraught with danger and 
best considered "experiment at your own risk".

-- 
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/-/fMVcRsiQV9MJ.
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.

Reply via email to