On 8/5/05, Mark Phippard <MarkP@softlanding.com> wrote:
> > I'd disagree with you on this. Actually CVS itself doesn't really have
> > anything like update with, or synchronize. It is Eclipse UI which is
> trying to
> > unify common VCS operations under single UI and that would be quite
> > for the users who have to deal with more then one VCS at the same time
> (I see
> > both CVS and SVN as very common case). Unfortunately Subclipse currently
> > trying to mimic TortoiseSVN UI, probably for historical reasons or
> because of
> > preferences of the developers.
> I think you are overstating this a bit. I have used several different SCM
> providers in Eclipse and they all have their own ways of doing things. I
> would agree that at some level the Eclipse developers are trying to create
> something generic that others can reuse, but let's face it, they are still
> doing what serves their own needs first.
Heh. You are right, but I believe that is only because none of the VCS
vendors like to perticipate and encourage Eclipse team plugins to be more
I am sorry that you view our UI as unfortunate, but I think it is a big
> improvement over the CVS UI in most places and entirely appropriate as the
> UI for a Subversion SCM provider.
I didn't mean to insult you or anything. Current UI is completely fine from
the Subversion point of view. I'm just trying to say that it is quite
annoying to have two parallel and yet completely independent and unsimilar
sets of menu layouts for two such commonly used VCS providers, especially
for those who have to deal with both of them at the same time (like I do).
That is why I tried to vote for unified repository and synchonize views (to
have all VCS providers in same tree) as well as for unified resource history
view (to get automatic context switching when jumping between differently
shared resources)... can't remember all Eclipse enh. requests at the moment.
Received on Sat Aug 6 00:48:15 2005