On Die, 2003-01-28 at 13:05, Jimmy Wales wrote:
----- Forwarded message from Michael Hardy
<hardy(a)math.mit.edu> -----
From: Michael Hardy <hardy(a)math.mit.edu>
Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2003 22:16:19 -0500 (EST)
To: jwales(a)bomis.com
Subject: edit conflicts
We desparately need a better way to handle edit conflicts
than the current method of destroying 20 minutes work without
warning. -- Mike
Hi Michael,
yes, we need a better way to handle edit conflicts; but in any case,
your work should not be destroyed! Unless something went very wrong, you
should be given two edit windows, one with the new version saved by
someone else and one with your version, and a list of changes. You can
then incorporate (copy&paste) your changes into the new version. Please
let us know if this was not the case.
There are some things we can do:
1) Use the "merge" UNIX utility or write our own code to try to
auto-merge in case of conflicts; only present edit conflict (with a
single edit window and CVS style conflict markers) when text cannot be
merged
2) Show a warning if someone has started to edit the text < x minutes
before you have
3) On Talk pages, provide links to append comments, which should work
with every revision
These have been talked about before and will likely be implemented at
some point.
Regards,
Erik
--
FOKUS - Fraunhofer Insitute for Open Communication Systems
Project BerliOS -
http://www.berlios.de