Georg Nikodym <georgn(a)canada.sun.com> writes:
>>>>> "Hrvoje" == Hrvoje Niksic
<hniksic(a)srce.hr> writes:
Hrvoje> SL Baur <steve(a)xemacs.org> writes:
>> > 2. Is the default (disabled) intentional?
>>
>> I vaguely remember it being intentional. There are definitely
>> problems with the implementation.
Yup. I started it and Martin hacked it into configure.
Hrvoje> I think we should reenable the clash detection by default,
Hrvoje> and fix the problems if/when they arise.
Clash detection is an incredible fucking drag in an environment such as
the one here. The environment is many machines with a a bunch of NFS
servers. In order for clash detection (in its current design) to have
any value whatsoever the lock-directory needs to be a common NFS
directory. Now everybody in the group (which here is 75 engineers)
serializes on NFS creation (exclusive) of !!SUPERLOCK!! in the lock
directory. It's really hard to explain to the spoiled bastard that has a
4 CPU ultra that he has to wait for an NFS server to listen to him before
he can to a find-file on a local disk path!
Sorry, but I feel pretty strongly about this one.
Well, obviously you need to find someone in marketing/development to
provide 4 CPU ultras to all the main XEmacs developers so that they can
feel this incredible pain and be just that much more inclined to fix the
problem. Because we all know problems we are getting bit by get first
priority. :)
Then they just need a public NFS server that they could put their lock
directory on from the various areas of the country. then they would
_REALLY_ fix it quick. :)
-Bill P.