[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: obby

From: Richard M Stallman
Subject: Re: obby
Date: Sat, 23 May 2009 11:38:49 -0400

    X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
    From: Phil Hagelberg <address@hidden>
    To: address@hidden
    Subject: Re: obby
    Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
    Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 09:42:56 -0700
    In-Reply-To: <address@hidden> (Richard M. Stallman's
            message of "Thu, 21 May 2009 14:35:39 -0400")
    Message-ID: <address@hidden>
    MIME-Version: 1.0
    Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

    Richard M Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

    >     I had planned to revisit the problem once the new implementation of 
    >     obby protocol and client (now called Infinote) had been released. But
    >     implementing inclusion transformation is very difficult.
    > Can you tell us more about this problem?

    The first part involves keeping a lot of state. Every edit that could be
    re-applied (by someone else sending a conflicting edit to the same
    portion of the document before yours reached the server) would need to
    be stored along with some metadata. (It may be possible to tie into
    Emacs' existing undo mechanism for this part if you were able to add
    some metadata to each action.)

I don't think that would be too hard.

    But then if you are notified of a conflict, you need to un-apply your
    changes, apply the canonical ones you received from the server, and
    transform your edits so they apply cleanly. This is pretty

It sounds like what undo-make-selective-list does.
This might be quite easy.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]