git lock files (Was: GIT for Microsoft Access projects)
- From
Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com>
- Date
- Jun 9, 2015, 17:19 UTC
- Message-ID
- <1433870383-7631-1-git-send-email-sbeller@google.com>
- In-Reply-To
- <5576F02B.4040002@gmail.com>
Just because Git allows distributed workflows, doesn't mean we should only focus on being distributed IMHO.
The question for content not being mergable easily pops up all the time. (Game/Graphics designers, documents, all this binary stuff, where there is no good merge driver).
I could imagine a "git lock" command which looks like this:
git config lock.centralServer origin
git config lock.defaultBranch master git lock add [branch] [--] <path/to/file>
git lock remove [branch] [--] <path/to/file>
git lock ls [<branch>]And the way this is implemented is roughly (unoptimized, just showing how you would achieve this with todays command set):
git fetch --depth=1 $(git config --get lock.centralServer) refs/locks/$(git config --get lock.defaultBranch)
git checkout refs/locks/$(git config --get lock.centralServer)/$(git config --get lock.defaultBranch)
switch(option) {
case add:
if exist <path/to/file>
return -1
else
echo $(git config --get user.name) $(date) > <path/to/file>
git add <path/to/file> && git commit "add new lock"
fi
case remove:
if exist <path/to/file>
# todo: check if the same user locked it before
rm <path/to/file>
else
return -1
fi
case ls:
ls -R .
}
git push $(git config --get lock.centralServer) refs/locks/$(git config --get lock.defaultBranch)
git <restore working tree, branch>That said you could just manipulate the git objects directly, no need to check out to the working dir.
The server would only need to allow pushes to a refs/locks directory and be done. the client side would need to have a plumbing command, so you could easily integrate a git locking to your application if you don't want to provide a merge driver.
Thanks, Stefan