Philippe Marschall wrote:
> 2007/10/2, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de>:
>> Help! This is completely unusable. If I hadn't added my little patch
>> that recovers the versions involved in the lock up there would be open
>> mutiny here by now. How can you run a Squeaksource installation with a
>> *bit* of stability?
> 
> Hey, it's open source man! Either pay me a million dollars of fix it yourself.
> 
> If you want something reliable use professional software like Apache +
> WebDAV or Gemstone.
> 
> *just kidding*

Well, I'm not. I'd be perfectly happy to pay my share if someone were to 
offer a solution that actually works. Not quite a million dollars but a 
couple of hundred for sure. After all it's our source repository we are 
talking about.

> I don't want to point fingers but all the information we have so far
> hints that the bug is not in SqueakSource but in Squeak itself or the
> VM (Sockets, Delays, Semaphores, ....). If you have some evidence that
> points to SqueakSource I'll be happy to look into it.

Thanks I'll try this. I hadn't applied these changes to that particular 
image (mostly because I try to touch a working installation as little as 
possible) but to the best of my understanding of the situation the 
problem always occurs when it tries to save a snapshot of the data. 
Which is really not that surprising if you consider what I wrote a while 
back about saves being locked against each other but not serialized with 
incoming modification requests.

Cheers,
   - Andreas