>>> Do you mean "changes to a file" (ie. contents are only synced on >>> file >>> write) or do you mean "changes to a buffer" (ie collaborative real- >>> time editing over the web)? >> >> You are right, it should be "buffer". I'll change it. >> >> Not sure about the "over the web" part. This won't be easy to >> implement >> locally anyway.
What would this be good for if it works only locally then? > Wow, this seems like an enormous can of worms. Do you have a > centralized server or a peer-to-peer architecture? Discovery. > Authentication. Security. Session management. Server farms. > Distributed transactions. Failover. Recovery. Cross-platform. Buzzword > bingo. Distributed transactions, failover, recovery, cross-platform and within limits even discovery, authenticaion and security are problems you have to deal with locally as well. (I'm not saying doing this over the web doesn't make it quite a bit harder, but I don't see any value in this feature without web support.) > Nico --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
