Community technical support mailing list was retired 2010 and replaced with a professional technical support team. For assistance please contact: Pre-sales Technical support via email to sales@march-hare.com.
Tony Hoyle wrote: > Julian Brierley wrote: > >> My experimental code, which is a hack of a recent snapshot of >> CVSNT_2_0_x, seems to show such an approach is feasible although there >> are many scenarios still to test. >> >> Does anyone have any views on the desirability of such a change? Have >> I overlooked something? Are there any better approaches? >> > Did you ever get anywhere with this? > > The biggest problem is that the clients expect the edit information to > be global. Edit -c also is a simple check to see if 'editors' returns > any output... it'd have to be much more complex for tag/branch support. > > It'd probably be best to junk the existing fileattr format and start > again with a new one (it has other problems eg. you can't edit a file > with '+' in the filename). As long as the client/server communication > is compatible then that shouldn't cause any problems. > > Tony > Yes I did and it seems to work as expected - at least for my testing of local and client/server edit, unedit and commit operations. I used the revised fileattr _editors format mentioned previously. For the experiment I limited the code changes by continuing to pass the old val format into notify_do and assembled the new one in editor_set. This needs to be tidied up. As you say Edit -c needed to check for an editor of the same tag. Commit -c for a tag and sandbox match. notify_do now needs the val parameter to do an unedit of the correct branch. There is one call to notify_do where I was unable to supply the val parameter - the one from RCS_unlock. I could not see in what circumstances a clear of an edit would be required from this call - can you enlighten me? Several other functions needed to be aware of the new branchtag. fileattr_modify had to be made case insensitive because of the pathname in the attribute key - this change might be undesirable in other cases? What sort of fileattr format did you have in mind? Julian