[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: crdt.el: proposal that server enforces the mode\
From: |
Qiantan Hong |
Subject: |
Re: crdt.el: proposal that server enforces the mode\ |
Date: |
Thu, 22 Oct 2020 00:16:56 +0000 |
>
>> I’m not sure about the idea of letting the server “dictate”
>> anything. Emotionally I don’t like it — I try to avoid power
>> hierarchy. And technically, I can synchronize Boolean variable also
>> using CRDT.
>
> dictate
>
> * Overview of verb dictate
>
> The verb dictate has 3 senses (first 2 from tagged texts)
> 1. (8) order, prescribe, dictate -- (issue commands or orders for)
> 2. (1) dictate -- (say out loud for the purpose of recording; "He dictated a
> report to his secretary")
> 3. dictate -- (rule as a dictator)
>
> My usage of dictate is in the sense of definition 1, not 3, so when
> you press a key in Emacs you already issue some commands, if you share
> a buffer, you dictate that it is shared, right?
>
> crdt.el shall be collaborative, with many factors in synchronization.
>
So in this occasion particularly, I’m asking whether should the server
decide exclusively what minor-mode to enable, or values of buffer local
variables,
or any client can change it?
For Boolean variables (like on/off of minor modes), I can give write access to
every peer and synchronize it using PN counter CRDT. I can also do similar
thing to some other buffer local variables with the help of some annotations.
However, (although I don’t like it very much), I think one can argue that giving
server exclusive write permission avoid communicational conflicts or even chaos.
What do you think?
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature