[BUG] Pull command on Windows: we have 2 problems

[Robert Collins]

On Thu, 2005-10-27 at 11:47 -0400, Aaron Bentley wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> Robert Collins wrote:
> > I think thats a really bad idea.
> > 
> > It implies a process wide identity map for the separate lock at a
> > minimum,
> 
> This is what I meant by 'keeping a global dict of LocationLocks'
> 
>  and raises IMO hairy questions - for instance, if I open a
> > write lock in one instance, create a new branch instance and take a read
> > lock, then close the first instances write lock and grab a new one -
> > should it succeed or fail?
> 
> Since that would succeed with a single branch, it should succeed with two.

With a single branch the following would happen:
write lock open
lock++
lock--
lock++
lock--
write lock closed, transaction ends, data flushed to disk.

I think its pretty unexpected that separate branch objects should
interact to do that.

I'd *much* rather jump through whatever hoops are needed to make branch
objects available where needed than have globals of any sort.

Rob



-- 
GPG key available at: <http://www.robertcollins.net/keys.txt>.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20051027/8082f134/attachment.pgp