Mark Phippard wrote:
>We have been plugging away at adding actions, for the most part with
>success. The main problem is that the core Sync code just seems to have
>some problems. We think we have corrected a couple of these (and
>committed them) but it is hard to tell. Clearly, the Sync stuff operates
>on some kind of cache of information and it seems like the problem lies
>somewhere within that cache. When we started working on this, after you
>committed or updated items they never disappeared from the Sync view, even
>if you deleted it and ran the action again. This seems to be corrected
>now. The main problems now seem to be with incoming additions/deletions.
>Generally, after you update these items they never go away. They always
>show as additions. Stepping through the code there is nothing obvious
>that is wrong, which tells me it is buried deep in the class hierarchy of
>the process.
>
>Does anyone have any thoughts they can share on how the core Sync code
>should work or where it can be fixed? I would be very interested in what
>was tried in the past and what led the code to being what it is currently.
> It doesn't use some of the same provided "API" classes that CVS does. It
>would be tempting to just toss aside the code and try to rewrite it based
>on the current docs and API, but I just suspect the code is where it is
>for a good reason.
>
>
Aproximately one year ago, before I had learnt about Subclipse, I wanted
to write a Subversion plugin for Eclipse. So I started browsing the
sources (Eclipse 2.x) for the "Team" component, and what disencouraged
me (to the point that I didn't eve start the project) was the fact that
most SCM functionality was in the "CVS" component, and most of this API
wasn't even public.
From https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=82074#c2, I
understand that the "Team" functionality has been recently extracted
from "CVS".
I don't know when Subclipse was started, but I guess that is the reason
"the code is where it is". But I guess we'll have to take a closer look
to check if it's worth rewriting parts of the plugin to reuse the "Team"
functionality instead of rounding our reinvented whell. :)
Thanks,
Daniel Serodio
>I think if this "refresh" business could be sorted out it would advance
>the state of this action greatly. The majority of it works just fine, but
>I think this issue interjects a lot of perceived "flakiness" into the
>behavior. For example, sometimes when the view comes up the status
>indicators say there are 5 incoming changes, but I only see 2. If I click
>through the various Incoming/Outgoing modes, then all 5 items will show
>up. Stuff like that. I cannot help but think we are missing some
>critical pieces of "infrastructure" code that would magically make it all
>just work.
>
>Does anyone have any contacts with the Eclipse Team developers? I recall
>that they mentioned in the Subversion bugzilla entry that they might be
>willing to pitch-in at some point. Now would be a good time. I think we
>have advanced Subclipse to being very close to release quality. It would
>be nice if we could get some of this stuff sorted out and behind us.
>
>Thanks
>
>Mark
>
>
>Panagiotis Korros <panagiotis.korros@gmail.com> wrote on 12/06/2004
>02:27:27 PM:
>
>
>
>>I was working on the synchronization support for subversion but
>>currently I don't have the time to complete it. All the work I have
>>done is committed to the repository so there is no overlapping.
>>
>>These are some of the issues that must be addressed:
>>
>>1. Add commit action where appropriate
>>2. Add revert action where appropriate
>>3. Add ignore action where appropriate
>>4. Test and fix the update action
>>5. Fix the synchronizer to correctly show locally deleted/missing
>>
>>
>resources
>
>
>>6. Enhance the sync view decorator to show more info (e.g. switched or
>>external resources, revision, authors, dates etc)
>>7. Enhance the sync view to show property changes
>>
>>and some nice enhancements that would be welcomed:
>>
>>1. Add support for commit sets (Eclipse 3.1)
>>2. Add more fine grained progress information.
>>
>>Any help would be welcomed!
>>
>>On Mon, 6 Dec 2004 13:46:09 -0500, Mark Phippard <markp@softlanding.com>
>>
>>
>wrote:
>
>
>>>Has anyone done anything to itemize the work remaining to get
>>>
>>>
>Synchronize
>
>
>>>fully working? What is being worked on, and by whom, and what is
>>>
>>>
>left? We
>
>
>>>are going to work on hooking up the commit action. We can do more if
>>>someone says what needs to be done. We just do not want to step on
>>>
>>>
>anyone
>
>
>>>else's work, and it will be easier for us to get started if we are
>>>
>>>
>pointed
>
>
>>>at specific pieces that are needed.
>>>
>>>Thanks
>>>
>>>
Received on Thu Jan 6 05:20:48 2005