Rob, I thought there was a lock function that could prevent others from checking out a file?
Up until the punching, it was a real nice party.
Kaylee ,'Shindig'
Buffistas Building a Better Board
Do you have problems, concerns or recommendations about the technical side of the Phoenix? Air them here. Compliments also welcome.
§ ita § - Jan 10, 2003 4:47:40 pm PST #2758 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Rob - Jan 10, 2003 4:50:46 pm PST #2759 of 10000
There is, I think, but I've never seen it used. It just isn't necessary, and on large projects could make it hard to get any work done. It would be impossible to get a lock on all the files you wanted to change.
§ ita § - Jan 10, 2003 4:53:04 pm PST #2760 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Yikes. I'm kinda pro it, because I need confidence that I'm the only one editing a class at a time.
Rob - Jan 10, 2003 5:01:27 pm PST #2761 of 10000
If it's one class per file, that can sorta work, assuming two people never need to work on different parts of the same class.
If there are multiple classes in a single file, exclusive access won't work very well at all.
And locking a single file doesn't help if I check in changes to a different file that your changes depend on. You still can't check in yourself until you merge with my changes and resolve any conflicts.
If colliding on the very same area of code is a concern, we should use the mailing list to announce the areas we're actively working on. That way we can all avoid making big changes to the same area at the same time.
§ ita § - Jan 10, 2003 5:05:58 pm PST #2762 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
It's one class per file, yes. And they're mostly independent, save thread and post. That's where my worry is. That and the basis of the page template -- those are where mutually buggering changes are most likely.
Rob - Jan 10, 2003 5:15:08 pm PST #2763 of 10000
Well, CVS prevents mutually buggering changes from being committed. You can't check in until your local copy is up-to-date with the repository.
Here's how it works:
I have showthread.php;1.3 on my Mac and I've edited it. You then commit a change, making the current version 1.4. If I tried to commit my changed, CVS would mock me with "up-to-date check failed for showthread.php;1.3".
After I wept bitter tears, I would use cvs update to update my local copies. CVS would merge your changes (diff between 1.3 and 1.4) into my local copy. Unless we had edited the exact same lines of code, this would happen automagically. If we had edited the same lines, cvs would make it look like this:
>>>>>>>> showthread.php 1.4[ita's beautiful code]
>>>>>>>>>[rob's crappy code]
>>>>>>>>>
I would then have to figure out how to resolve our conflict. Usually it's obvious.
Now, one hitch in this is that I could check in some files before I failed the up-to-date check on showthread.php. This is the reason you always want to update your local copy right before you check in. That way you don't half-way check in some changes and then have to quickly resolve conflicts to check in fully.
tralfamadore2001 - Jan 10, 2003 10:39:42 pm PST #2764 of 10000
"Passion, though a bad regulator, is a powerful spring."
— Ralph Waldo Emerson
I got this quote:
Who was the real power? The Captain? or Tenille?
Xander, 'Gingerbread'
But I think the quote is from "Ted"
Jon B. - Jan 10, 2003 11:06:48 pm PST #2765 of 10000
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
The Vonnegut-guy is correct. The transcript site confirms it was "Ted".
§ ita § - Jan 10, 2003 11:08:50 pm PST #2766 of 10000
Well not canonically, no, but this is transformative fiction.
Done. Season changed from 3 to two.
tralfamadore2001 - Jan 11, 2003 10:43:03 pm PST #2767 of 10000
"Passion, though a bad regulator, is a powerful spring."
— Ralph Waldo Emerson
The Vonnegut-guy is correct.
Hee, Vonnegut. Okay, done now. (But... Vonnegut-girl. It amuses me that tralfamadore is masculine, or usually seen that way.)
Thanks, ita. Okay, really done now.