Re: resolve conflict dialog is confusing

> Complaints in earlier posts seem to be confusing the concept of working
> copies, repositories and what the merge was actually modifying.

I am not even sure that the previous posts indicate this
misunderstanding. So far I believe everyone here knows how merging
works, it's just that the terms being used for the different actions
are not straightforward.

> OK, I hate to admit it but when I think about it again, I'm confused
> too, and I wrote the docs, dammit!

Heh, glad to get some support from that side ;)

> merged in a working copy. There are no local changes (*) so the term
> 'prefer local' is indeed confusing.

I'd agree with that. When updating your working copy instead of
merging, it does indeed make more sense. I don't think I ever got this
dialog when upading the working copy though and can't seem to find
this situation in the docs either?

> but you do have to think about it, which is what people here are complaining about.

Thanks, that's pretty much to the point.

> Showing paths is one way, but only works when the paths are short,

You could shorten the paths though. There is a WINAPI function
available that omits parts of the path in the middle and keeps the
important information (start and end), at least for local file paths.
Don't know if it works for URLs.

> I'm not sure it makes it that much clearer anyway.

At least, it connects the buttons with information the user is
familiar with, that is the names of the repositories/branches/version
numbers.

> Another option would be to put tooltips on the buttons.

Since that is rarely done, I'd assume that no one would expect and
then find these tooltips.

> something like "Discard incoming lines which conflict and keep what is
> already there" and Prefer Repository could have "Accept incoming lines
> which conflict in preference to what is already there".

I must admit that this does not add much clarity, sounds kinda
complicated to me (sorry).

> OTOH the reason I have never bumped into this myself is that I have
> never used those buttons. I would always use Edit Conflicts

Yep, I'd agree with that as well, but IIRC, "edit conflicts" only uses
the not so helpful terms "mine" and "theirs". I many cases, "mine"
might apply to both sides or no side at all.

So I still like the solution with path information, but "edit
conflicts" might also need some adjustments.

------------------------------------------------------
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4061&dsMessageId=2858865

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2011-10-19 18:24:44 CEST