[Nathaniel McCallum]
> On Sun, 2005-11-13 at 15:03 -0600, John A Meinel wrote:
>> I am happy to hear alternative possibilities. But the above work flow
>> is
>> very difficult to scale above a 1-1 relationship, since you have the
>> problem Erik mentioned, where a commit into one branch, needs to
>> successfully commit into multiple other branches. We can always add
>> 2-phase commit, but it seems to be unnecessary overhead at this
>> point.
> The first stage of a --sync'd commit is merging in all remote branches.
> That is where it would fail.
No, not necessarily; without a two-phase commit, sync-merging with
more than one shadow would introduce a race condition.
Imagine developers A and B who both tries to update shadows X and Y,
which are at revno 42.
A <- X@42
A -> X # Creates 43a
B <- Y@42
B -> Y # Creates 43b
A -> Y # Wants to create 43a, but 43b is already present.
|
