Re: obby

[Richard M Stallman]

    X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00 autolearn=ham 
            version=3.1.0
    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 
the
    >     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
    complicated.

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