On Tuesday, 13 February 2018 11:04:10 GMT Adrien Monteleone wrote: > > On Feb 13, 2018, at 4:15 AM, Maf. King <m...@chilwell.net> wrote: > >
> > > > Making the lock hidden makes good sense, but that would break backward > > compatability for precisely those users that need a lock the most - > > different machines with probably different GC versions with data on a > > network share. > Other apps have no problem looking for their ‘hidden lock file’ to keep > users from opening the file more than once from different systems, even > over a network. The lock file does not need to be visible to the user for > the app to see it and use it. (commonly accomplished with a preceding “.” > in the file name or setting a ‘hidden’ flag) > > Certainly, newer versions using the hidden lock file, could easily still > look for the non-hidden one. Though I suppose if the older version didn’t > know to look for it, that could be an issue if the non-hidden one weren’t > already there. However, if a user has different versions of GC on two > different machines accessing the same data file, they are already asking > for trouble. Sometimes, backwards compatibility should be broken. This > might be one of those cases, though it should not be the only break. (it > should be introduced either with 3.0 if still possible, or held till 4.0) Absolutely agree, no problem with dot-lock files on a share, I was just pointing out that a change in locking strategy could have implications, so it isn't just a case of prepending a dot to the lock file as a quick patch in some point release.... Maf. _______________________________________________ gnucash-user mailing list gnucash-user@gnucash.org To update your subscription preferences or to unsubscribe: https://lists.gnucash.org/mailman/listinfo/gnucash-user If you are using Nabble or Gmane, please see https://wiki.gnucash.org/wiki/Mailing_Lists for more information. ----- Please remember to CC this list on all your replies. You can do this by using Reply-To-List or Reply-All.
