[Zope-dev] Re: Zope + Ape + Subversion (was: RE: Using a truely revis ion based storage for Zope ?)

2004-04-16 Thread Casey Duncan
On Thu, 15 Apr 2004 20:40:09 -0400 (EDT) Shane Hathaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 14 Apr 2004, Kapil Thangavelu wrote: although i wonder if there is some hand waving in progress here that i can't see. i guess my semantic notion of versions has been that of long lived transactions,

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope + Ape + Subversion (was: RE: Using a truely revis ion based storage for Zope ?)

2004-04-14 Thread Casey Duncan
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 06:59:05 -0400 Kapil Thangavelu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, 2004-04-13 at 12:01, Shane Hathaway wrote: On Tue, 13 Apr 2004, Kapil Thangavelu wrote: since objects modified in a version are in essence locked from participating in other transactions, actions

[Zope-dev] Re: Zope + Ape + Subversion (was: RE: Using a truely revis ion based storage for Zope ?)

2004-04-14 Thread Casey Duncan
On Wed, 14 Apr 2004 09:50:17 -0400 Casey Duncan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [..] In practical terms this would mean that the versioned catalog would need to keep track of the uids that had been cataloged, uncataloged and reindexed in the version. The merge would mean cataloging, uncataloging and