Re: [Nmh-workers] Locking In Scripts and nmh Locking

[norm]

Ken Hornstein <address@hidden> writes:
>>To make sure I understand this, I will discuss only the the -all case, which 
>>is
>>all I asked for. (There would appear to be complex interactions between the
>>other cases; it would hurt my brain to understand them.)
>
>The more I look at it ... it seems that -all won't work.  Right now the
>users of locking are:
>
>- Context I/O
>- Sequence I/O
>- Annotations
>- MIME cache
>- slocal (updating the duplicate supression database).
>
>The first two are the ones we care about right now.
>
>Context is easy, but the sequences are kept per-folder. I'm assuming you don't
>want -all to lock all of the sequences in all of your folders.

Yes, I do. I it to lock EVERYTHING. Maybe you want to get fancy and give mhlock
options for partial locking capabilities, but there ought to be a way to lock
EVERYTHING. Indeed I would vote for EVERYTHING to be the default. I want to
write scripts and be oblivious as possible to locking issues.

>So I don't think we can have -all.
>
>--Ken
>

    Norman Shapiro
    798 Barron Avenue
    Palo Alto CA 94306-3109
    (650) 565-8215
    address@hidden