[Kde-scm-interest] Have we arrived to a dead end?

Thiago Macieira thiago at kde.org
Sat Feb 13 10:30:16 CET 2010

Em Sexta-feira 12. Fevereiro 2010, às 23.59.43, Oswald Buddenhagen escreveu:
> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:19:29PM +0100, Thiago Macieira wrote:
> > Em Sexta-feira 12. Fevereiro 2010, às 19.05.51, Oswald Buddenhagen 
> > > one thing is truly transparent submodule handling, including
> > > atomicity (real or something close to it).
> > 
> > Atomicity and multiple repositories is impossible. Forget it.
> not if the meta-push would be able to lock its submodules. but i've
> already pondered that in another mail ...

Remember that there's no atomicity if you push two branches to the same 

One of them could fail and the other be updated.

Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
  Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks
      PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
      E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C  966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 190 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20100213/d396de42/attachment.sig 

More information about the Kde-scm-interest mailing list