Meres Galore!

[William Grant]

Jordan Mantha wrote:
> Is there an inherent reason why we can't just use a temporary "lock" 
> solution like we did in Dapper where when you want to do a merge you 
> filed a bug and closed it when you were done? If we tagged the bugs with 
> "[Feisty merge]" it would be fairly easy to see what's going on. Then 
> when people go to do a merge/sync the first thing they could look for is 
> an existing bug. Is that too much bug traffic? It seems to me the issue 
> is not so much "ownership" as duplication of effort (we don't want 2 
> people merging/uploading the same thing) so putting a temporary lock on 
> a merge while you are working on it is really what we are looking for.
> 
> -Jordan

I think that a significantly better idea would be to have a temporary 
locking feature in MoM itself, so you can see immediately whether it has 
been taken or not. A comment field would be nice too, for noting that a 
merge cannot be done for such-and-such reason.

William.