Simon Large wrote:
> I would put this the other way.
> 1) File has svn:needs-lock, wc has no lock -> overlay = 'no entry'
> 2) File has svn:needs-lock, wc does have lock -> overlay =
> 'insubversion' 3) the file doesn't have svn:needs-lock, -> 0verlay =
Agreed, it's six of one v. half a dozen of the other.
The only reason I suggested replacing the 'in svn' overlay with 'green key'
is to act as a clue that locking is now a possibility. You could think of it
as a paradigm shift :-)
> I don't personally like the idea of showing a key for files which are
> not involved in locking, and the existing green in-subversion icon
> implies that you can edit anyway. But as I said before, that's really
> just tinkering with the overlay images and doesn't imply a
> change to the code.
It depends upon which you would want more 'visible'.
One person may be more interested in the editability of a file while another
is more interested in the locking attributes. This can be done with
alternate icon sets depending upon personal preference.
We just can't reliably show all three overlays.
> If you want a green key, you can submit an icon set which has
> 'insubversion' replaced with 'green key'.
Smoke and mirrors, agreed. We already have multiple icon sets.
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org
*** Confidentiality Notice *** Proprietary/Confidential
Information belonging to CGI Group Inc. and its affiliates
may be contained in this message. If you are not a recipient
indicated or intended in this message (or responsible for
delivery of this message to such person), or you think for
any reason that this message may have been addressed to you
in error, you may not use or copy or deliver this message
to anyone else. In such case, you should destroy this
message and are asked to notify the sender by reply email.
Received on Thu Apr 14 18:21:32 2005