On 11/3/07, Stefan Küng <email@example.com> wrote:
> There's one small issue I have with how changelists are kept/removed on
> commits: currently, the changelist is only removed on a commit if the
> commit is actually done on that particular changelist (and if the flag
> is not set to keep the changelist).
> But I think it would be better if after the commit, all affected files
> have their changelists removed, no matter if the commit was done by
> specifying a changelist or not.
> This would make it more consistent. The '--keep-changelist' argument
> wouldn't be dependent on the '--changelist ARG' parameter.
> I'm having the following workflow in mind:
> * user starts working on an issue, modifies files
> * adds files to changelist
> * tests issue, changes some more code, and one or more other files
> * user forgets to add those to the changlist for that issue
> * user commits files belonging to the issue, forgets about the
> changelist set
> now, the files (even though they're committed and now with status
> 'normal') still belong to the changelist the user set before. The next
> time one of those files get modified, they will show up in the 'svn st
> -v' with a changelist name the user might have completely forgotten by then.
> And of course there's another reason which has to do on how TSVN made up
> the UI for the changelists and how it does commits: The commits are
> independent of changelist names - everything the user has selected gets
> committed. TSVN only helps the user to group items into changelists
> (i.e., add them to a changelist) and select the items by changelist. But
> they're still committed without a changelist name.
> I've changed TSVN now to include the changelist name if all selected
> items belong to the same changelist. But if even one item is checked for
> commit which doesn't belong to that changelist, the commit is done the
> normal way and the changelist doesn't get removed after the commit.
> We already had some users complain about this, because they just assume
> that the changelists get removed from those files even if some other
> files are committed too. They have a hard time understanding why that
> doesn't happen.
I did not realize it worked this way. I agree with you. If you
commit something it ought to remove it from any changelists it is a
member of. I'd be interested to hear what others think, especially if
they do not think it should do this.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Sat Nov 3 20:54:49 2007