Ive always thought something like this could work: https://github.com/nodegit/nodegit
where saving a tiddler could trigger a commit object. That way, conflicts, merges, etc could be handled the way it is usually handled in version controlled systems. On Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 10:14:34 AM UTC-6, joearms wrote: > > An alternative might be some form of transaction memory. > > When a tiddler is served over a network it has last-modified time (this is > the time when the server > last stored a modification) > > If a user edits a tiddler and sends it back it should include this time. > Call this Told. > > When the server receives an updated tiddler it checks to see if Told > is identical to the current last modified time of the tiddler if so the > update > succeeds. > > If the two are not identical the update fails - and the user is told that > their new tiddler value is not an update to the latest value of the > tiddler. > > They should then get the latest version and resolve any conflicts. > > This works pretty well if we make a couple of assumptions > > 1) people do not edit the same tiddlers at the same time > 2) edits are relatively quick > > This way nothing gets locked and there are no checkins/outs. > > Actually, each tiddler could be (internally) a write-append-only log of > diffs > this way no data gets lost and we can back up to any old value. > > Cheers > > /Joe > > > > On Wednesday, 23 January 2019 01:50:01 UTC+1, TonyM wrote: >> >> Folks, >> >> I have raised this a number of times in a number of contexts but *NOW I'm >> Serious - We need Check in and Check Out* >> >> TWC had a method to allow serial editors and a lock file (that all can >> see). We need this as an option to TW5 as well. >> >> Why? >> >> 1. TiddlyWikis can be used as smart documents served from a file or >> network location without fear of contention and overwrite (Single File or >> Network served) >> 2. Its a "poor mans" multi-user wiki - Serial multi-user update >> access NOT Multi-user multi-access >> 3. TW-Receiver could provide read/update access to any number of >> users knowing simultaneously is not available. >> 4. The lack of such a facility is driving some of the complexity we >> face trying to simplify the saving process, if we could check in out >> documents reliably we secure the the wiki from corruption/overwrite. >> 5. It could help users protect them from themselves opening the same >> wiki from more than one tab/or browser without needing a server solution. >> 6. Perhaps TiddlyDesktop and the other servers could also honour this >> allowing free transfer between platforms. >> >> How >> >> I am confident we have the technology and avenues by which to achieve >> this, I do not believe their is a technical barrier any more. An example in >> point is some of the local save tools, we know they are writing information >> such as backups, so we have the ability to read and write a switch/lock and >> we can include an informational user name in that switch. >> >> We could provide a checked out to current user with a save and check in >> button. We could provide a NO check out user with a reload and check in >> button (if not locked) >> >> I can provide more technical possibilities if requested, but some of you >> I expect already know how to do this. >> >> Feedback please! >> >> Thanks tony >> > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWikiDev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to tiddlywikidev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To post to this group, send email to tiddlywikidev@googlegroups.com. Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/tiddlywikidev. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywikidev/f92dba1b-a115-46e1-b43c-97656be4e51a%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
