[p4] exclusive checkout across branches

[Jamie.Echlin@barclayscapital.com]

Hi Steve, thanks for you replies.

Yep I thought the +l was only on the branch, so wondering whether a
trigger or using the protections table is the best approach.

cheers, jamie


> -----Original Message-----
> From: steve at vance.com [mailto:steve at vance.com] 
> Sent: 08 January 2007 12:49
> To: Echlin, Jamie: IT (LDN); perforce-user at perforce.com
> Subject: RE: [p4] exclusive checkout across branches
> 
> 
> The +l modifier will only affect the instance of the file on 
> a particular
> branch. If you need it exclusive across all branches, you will have to
> invent your own mechanism.
> 
> Also, a reminder. If you decide each instance is sufficient 
> and change the
> type to include +l, be sure to use the -t flag when you integrate the
> changed file type around so that the file type change propagates.
> 
> Original Message:
> -----------------
> From:  Jamie.Echlin at barclayscapital.com
> Date: 	Mon, 8 Jan 2007 11:31:37 -0000
> To: perforce-user at perforce.com
> Subject: [p4] exclusive checkout across branches
> 
> 
> Sorry for all the traffic, trying to bring myself up to speed.
> 
> A group has certain files that should be "exclusively lock", including
> across branches. This is particular named files, not all having a
> certain extension or anything so simple. 
> 
> I guess an implementation option is using +l in the typemap, and
> protections file to make read-only everywhere except the main 
> branch. I
> don't want to do this because I'm wary of adding many rows to
> protections, also I want something whereby they can make 
> changes to this
> list without having to be admin.
> 
> I guess many people have this sort of requirement, any suggestions?
> 
> My preferred option is a trigger which would read a project-supplied
> file containing list of "special access rules", ie depot path patterns
> and rules. However the trigger would only fire on submitting the
> changelist, not when they make the checkout. I prefer a 
> trigger because
> it allows us to provide some explanation of the failure - eg 
> please make
> these changes in this branch..., as opposed to using the permissions
> table which would just say "access denied"...
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> jamie
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> For more information about Barclays Capital, please visit our 
> web site at
> http://www.barcap.com.
> 
> Internet communications are not secure and therefore the 
> Barclays Group
> does not accept legal responsibility for the contents of this 
> message. 
> Although the Barclays Group operates anti-virus programmes, 
> it does not
> accept responsibility for any damage whatsoever that is 
> caused by viruses
> being passed.  Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the
> author and do not necessarily represent those of the Barclays Group. 
> Replies to this email may be monitored by the Barclays Group for
> operational or business reasons.
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> perforce-user mailing list  -  perforce-user at perforce.com
> http://maillist.perforce.com/mailman/listinfo/perforce-user
> 
> 
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
> mail2web - Check your email from the web at
> http://mail2web.com/ .
> 
> 
>