[cvsnt] problems with edit/commit -c
jerzyk at wndtabs.com
Tue Sep 17 19:58:54 BST 2002
>You might think so (and I would tend to agree), but try explaining that to
a user who is accustomed to using >RCS/PVCS/SourceUnsafe/whatever.
Why would I have to waste my "precious" time doing that? ;)
There is a manual, and they can read it. There is no need to break the tool
just because of the merge-phobia, they will learn or go away - a win-win
Seriously thought, there is no need to worry too much, people adjust quite
easily. After we removed locking from WinCvs there is really very small
amount of complain or even interest in the locking. That indicates that
people can deal with concurent development if they only get a chance.
Typically they get overwhelmed by the supporters of locking and have no
chance to even try. Source Safe, for example, allows concurent developlemnt,
but typically it's not enabled for the "fear of merge". I would hate to see
the same happen to CVSNT...
----- Original Message -----
From: "Torsten Martinsen" <torsten at tiscali.dk>
To: "Jerzy Kaczorowski" <jerzyk at wndtabs.com>; <cvsnt at cvsnt.org>
Sent: Wednesday, September 18, 2002 2:31 AM
Subject: Re: [cvsnt] problems with edit/commit -c
> > This is one of the things I have been wanting to fix for a while - I
> > it would be quite easy to add a new keyword (say _exclusive) to
> > on the server. In this way true exclusive edits could be implemented.
> I don't think there is a need for "true exclusive edits" in CVS.
You might think so (and I would tend to agree), but try explaining that to a
user who is accustomed to using RCS/PVCS/SourceUnsafe/whatever.
cvsnt mailing list
cvsnt at cvsnt.org
More information about the cvsnt