Hi Tim, I have an objection.
Locking has nothing to do with "commit control". Allowing for svn locking functionality is opening a can of worms. What if somebody aquires a lock and loses network connectivity for a week (because of a Hurricane, because he forgot and went on vacation, etc.)? The whole svn philosophy is to allow for parrallel development, instead of the serialized development imposed by locking based repositories (Visual Source Safe, RCS, etc). I would sugget, instead, to put a BIG WARNING at the top of String.java, indicating that any change must first be approved on [EMAIL PROTECTED] I think that this would accomplish your goal in a more appropriate manner. Etienne Tim Ellison wrote: > To ensure that all committers can continue to update String, but that > they do so 'knowingly' (i.e. after considering the consequences) I'd > like to impose a 'positive action' pre-commit step by setting the > "svn:needs-lock" property on String.java. >... > If there are no objections I'll go ahead and do this. -- Etienne M. Gagnon, Ph.D. http://www.info2.uqam.ca/~egagnon/ SableVM: http://www.sablevm.org/ SableCC: http://www.sablecc.org/
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
