[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Re: RE: [Subclipse-dev] Bug introduced with 1.1.9 - LockDialog

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2006-12-12 16:48:34 CET

Did you debug to see if all those files came through? I ask because,
superficially, every version of the code I have committed would pass those
same tests. The difference for you is that writable files can get passed in
to the method and they cannot when I test it.

Mark

On 12/12/06, Thomas M. Hofmann <email@thomashofmann.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Mark,
>
> I tested your latest code and everything looks fine now. I then changed
> the isReadOnly method to use IFile API instead of java.io.File. It also
> works so I think calling iFile.isReadOnly would be the way to go.
>
> The test included a read only unmanged file, a read only managed file, a
> writable managed and a writable unmanaged file. I was prompted to lock the
> managed read only file and I got the prompt to switch the read only flag on
> the read only unmanaged file. No prompts appeared for the writable files.
>
> I noticed one more thing which is probably something that affects several
> classes: When I decide not to lock a read-only file I get an error message
> with an empty reason string. This is because the Status.CANCEL is returned
> which does not have and description (it should according to the javadoc in
> IFileModificationValidator). The same would be the case if the
> LockResourceCommand would fail.
>
> I appreciate the effort you put into this. Thank you very much!
>
>
> Thomas
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Mark Phippard [mailto:markphip@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tue 12.12.2006 02:36
> To: dev@subclipse.tigris.org
> Subject: Re: Re: RE: [Subclipse-dev] Bug introduced with 1.1.9 -
> LockDialog
>
>
> On 12/11/06, Thomas M. Hofmann <email@thomashofmann.com> wrote:
>
> Please try the attached patch. I still think the validator for the
> files not managed should only get the ones passed that are not managed.
>
> The patch is not based on your latest submission since I did not
> read your mail before I tried to change it myself.
>
> Thomas
>
>
> Please try again with latest. I did a major refactoring to split the
> files into managed and unmanaged so that they can be processed just once and
> separately. This should address your concerns. I am still using my
> java.io.File based method of determining if the files are read-only. I
> think the current code works correctly though. It is possible that is not
> necessary, but it does not really hurt anything.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
>
Received on Tue Dec 12 16:48:58 2006

This is an archived mail posted to the Subclipse Dev mailing list.