On Tuesday, February 15, "Win32 M$" wrote:
> I didn't start the thread about it - I just answered some other person
> question and it lit the fire. Why it lit the fire is because it is imprtant
> topic, and some solution have to come up sooner or later. VB files showed
> up when the request for a practical example have been made.
I did not say that you started this thread. I said that you jumped on the
locking thread, when you posted about needing this feature for your VB files.
Again, several people gave you workable solutions, without needing locks,
for versioning your VB files with CVS. In other words, your VB file example
is bogus.
> The whole point is that current CVS code is not perfect - we look for the
> ways to make it better. You look for the ways to ignore the problem and keep
> the wrong model.
Which is the wrong model? At one point you say "remove locks", the next time
you say "need locks"...
--Toby.
