Ben Collins-Sussman wrote:
> On 10/29/07, Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> FWIW, I only test with merge too. Because for updates, I just let the
>> conflict happen.
>> Imagine someone doing a lengthy update, goes for a coffee until the
>> update is finished. He returns, and finds that the update was stalled
>> due to the conflict callback asking for user input.
>> For the user, it doesn't make much of a difference whether he has to
>> resolve the conflicts at the end of the update or in between - the
>> conflicts are the same.
>> Only for merges it's important to resolve the conflicts right away,
>> because otherwise further merges could fail.
>
> Is this a configurable thing? I'd like to always be prompted during an update.
You mean in TSVN?
No, at least not right now, and it's not planned (yet). We've discussed
this a little on the mailing list, but people either didn't wanted to be
prompted at all during an update or they didn't care.
You can doubleclick on the red marked entries (the conflicts) in the
progress dialog after an update to resolve the conflicts. And TMerge
even has a button to mark the conflict as resolved (as you can do by
right-clicking on such a red conflicted entry from the context menu).
Why do you want to be prompted for every possible conflict *during* an
update and not just at the end of the update? If you could explain so I
can understand your reasons, I might add a configuration for this.
Stefan
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subversion.tigris.org
Received on Mon Oct 29 22:05:32 2007