273
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 21:
Line 21: − + + +
How groupthink could be more general (view source)
Revision as of 21:55, 10 March 2009
, 21:55, 10 March 2009no edit summary
Note that this "protocol" makes use of old versions; it is possible that it could include an undo stack and/or versioning storage for free. It is also remarkably non-chatty and so should scale well as long as communication reliability is good.
Note that this "protocol" makes use of old versions; it is possible that it could include an undo stack and/or versioning storage for free. It is also remarkably non-chatty and so should scale well as long as communication reliability is good.
The 3-way di
I realize I'm handwaving with the rdiff protocol. Even if you limit it to breaking on some definable chunk boundaries (word, sentence, line... whatever), its advantage comes from sending the sig for various chunks at once; yet the longer those chunk sequences are, the more fragile the algorithm when the two parties do not actually remember a common version.
The other tough algorithm is the "resolve the 3-way diff" step. But the important thing there is that even if it fails, collaboration can continue - one person just has to redo their edits.