branch locking mk2.

[John A Meinel]

Jan Hudec wrote:

...

> 
> There is this one issue that the locking does not solve, though. In
> Arch, the lock directory was used as a staging area. So breaking it
> actually destroyed the data prepared there, so the lock could always be
> safely broken. Ie. it was really a transaction.
> 
> Now bzr still needs the ability to break stale locks -- with no safe way
> to recognize a stale lock. Therefore it IMHO needs a way to make sure
> the repository does not break even if it accidentaly breaks a non-stale
> lock. Which the locking scheme by itself does not solve.
> 

Yes, this is an issue. Robert's proposal at least has the ability that
the bzr process which did the locking can be aware that it lost the lock.

We would have to redesign the storage layer to get transaction style
locking. Which has been discussed, but has other tradeoffs.

John
=:->

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 249 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
Url : https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/bazaar/attachments/20060208/26b9ca21/attachment.pgp