This one is close to my heart too, since I am introducing
subversion/subclipse to a large team using IBM RAD (Rational Something
Something), which is based on the 3.0.x Eclipse code base.
Mark: I appreciate the effort you're going to to keep subclipse
compatible with the 3.0 and 3.1 APIs. All I can say is please, please
keep it so ;)
Cheers,
Dan
Mark Phippard wrote:
>Reinhard Brandstaedter <reinhard.brandstaedter@ams-engineering.com> wrote
>on 07/18/2005 10:19:55 AM:
>
>
>
>>Hi Mark!
>>
>>
>>
>>>>And how is subclipse involved in this then?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>The way this works is that whenever a tool is about to open a file for
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>edit, it is supposed to call an Eclipse API method called
>>>
>>>
>validateEdit().
>
>
>>>This method is passed through to the team provide to decide whether to
>>>
>>>
>
>
>
>>>allow the edit, present any UI etc... There is another API involved
>>>called a ResourceRule which is where the decisions are made whether
>>>anything needs to be done or not. We are just using the default
>>>implementation of this that comes with Eclipse. This default
>>>implementation makes its decision based on whether the resource being
>>>edited has the read-only attribute set or not. So that is what is
>>>
>>>
>really
>
>
>>>being checked, not the Subversion needs:lock property. We chose to
>>>
>>>
>use
>
>
>>>this technique as it is more efficient and the only files in a
>>>
>>>
>Subversion
>
>
>>>working copy that should have the read-only attribute set are those
>>>
>>>
>which
>
>
>>>have the needs:lock property set.
>>>
>>>
>>Ok with that said I looked for read-only attributes in the checked out
>>repository. As expected none of the files has this attribute set. But
>>what I found out is that Windows XP seems to set the read-only attribute
>>
>>
>
>
>
>>on every folder on the whole drive. It's not possible to remove the
>>read-only attribute from the folders (even as administrator). Could it
>>be the case that Software Architect asks for the properties of the
>>folder and not the file and thus issues an lock request?
>>
>>I'm also forwarding this to IBM support.
>>
>>
>
>I added a workaround that fixes this for the one scenario that I know of.
>It will probably fix it for you too. I just added a "filter" to the array
>that we receive to re-check the read only status of the files. Like I
>said, this fixes it for me.
>
>This will be in our next release.
>
>Mark
>
>
>
>_____________________________________________________________________________
>Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
>_____________________________________________________________________________
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
>For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
>
>
>
Received on Tue Jul 19 03:49:20 2005