Re: a Grand Unified Locking Proposal (GULP, or perhaps, GULP! :-)

Ah... Eric's note brings up another possibility.  It might be a red
herring, but as Geoff's
proposal is currently written (and Eric's too I think) it still is a
possibly unexpected behavior.

User B  locks /a/b/ exclusively.

User D tries to do a shared lock on /a/b/c/d.html but fails because in the
proposal that
will also create a lock (or will it?) on /a/b/ which already has an
exclusive lock on it.

I'm not saying this is good or bad.  I'm just pointing it out as what
sounds like a difference
in the recent proposals relative to what we were proposing a month or more
ago.

Jason.