C: Right .
E: You know , p anybody can check out the code ,
E: but not everybody can check it in .
C: Right . And there 's some happy medium
E: Yeah .
C: and we don't know what that is yet until we get feedback from people ,
C: but what if it 's OK to just handle it with sort of a person in charge of the philosophy behind the changes ,
C: and some people with permissions , maybe by request , to make changes ,
C: That we don't just give people permissions if they 're not gonna make changes .
C: Because I 've overwritten a a file by mistake ,
C: not wanting to have done that
C: cuz I didn't think I had permission , when I did .
A: Mm - hmm .
C: Um , and then just seeing if that is enough to to handle the transcript changes .
F: Mm - hmm .
C: I 'm just worried about letting everybody go in and make changes ,
C: cuz it 's real easy when you 're trying to , I don't know , run alignments and there 's a word you wanna fix , to go in and do that and then mess up other things ,
C: if you don't know , you know , the overall philosophy behind the the conventions .
F: Mm - hmm .
A: Right .
E: Then There is also the possibility Remember , in CVS , when we talk about making changes , there 's sort of two types that can be made .
F: And als it also
F: Mm - hmm .
A: You can back everything out .
E: To your local , or to the global .
C: Mm - hmm .
E: And so people can make changes to their local
C: Right .
E: and if they screw those up , that 's , you know , in their that 's only on them .
C: Exactly .
F: Mm - hmm .
E: It 's w it 's the checking in part that r we really care about ,
E: and that we can control with , you know , who can check things in and stuff .
E: So we can I think we can do this .
C: Or just , yeah , start by make it a really tight control
F: Mm - hmm .
E: Mm - hmm .
C: and then as people really need the control you can ascertain whether or not to E: Yeah . They can still check it out E: Yeah , cuz they can still check out full copies and make whatever changes they want to their local copies .
C: Right .
E: And it won't affect the the g the global , official , ones at all .
C: Right .
A: Right , but what I want to avoid is ending up with two corpora .
D: Yeah .
E: Yes .
E: Definitely .
A: And so if you make it too hard for them to check back in , they 'll check it out once ,
E: Yep .
A: they 'll make all the changes ,
A: they 'll never tell us about the changes ,
E: Mm - hmm .
A: and we 'll get two different corpora .
E: Mm - hmm .
A: Right ?
C: I think we 're already gonna I mean there 's already some chance that different annotations , different places , you know C: But you can control that by knowing you 're making two corpora
C: or knowing that you 're adding um , annotations on one version and you don't have the latest corrections maybe at that point .
C: And then you finish the project and you realize that there were corrections made on your originals
C: and then you have to merge them .
C: And the b the thing that makes it ea OK to do that , is knowing where the synch time boundaries are .
C: Cuz you can automatically pretty much merge things if you 've only got twenty words or so in an utterance .
C: It 's when you get the whole meeting
C: and the synch times ch have changed ,
C: or you can't correspond to a previous version with synch times , that you get in trouble .
C: So .
C: Was there anything else on your list ?
A: Nope .
A: Shall we do some digits ?
C: Now , wait , are are we doing them simultaneously or one at a time ?
A: I wasn't planning on doing it simultaneously .
C: Alright .
E: Lee , you liked that l
E: huh ?
A: Oop ! <comment> Ouch !
F: Ooo !