"Vairoj A." <vairoj@hotpop.com> wrote on 09/26/2006 03:52:29 AM:
> As I have no knowledge on Eclipse API in general, I still do not
> thoroughly understand the discussion on the root cause of the issue,
> whether it is Subclipse or Eclipse responsibility. If you think there is
> still some issue with their suggestion, should we continue the
> discussion there? Or do you think we we should better file an issue in
> Subclipse and find some time to take care of it later? However, as you
> suggested, I think the issue should be given some priority as it could
> cause users to lost their data without knowing.
I think what he is saying is that the Local History is made simply as part
of Eclipse knowing that files are being changed and saved. The problem is
that when Subversion updates a file Eclipse doesn't know about it because
the Eclipse Resource API's are not being used to make the changes to the
file. What he suggested was that we run an Eclipse API to change the file
so that it was essentially empty. Doing this would trigger Eclipse to
save the previous contents in the Local History and then we would follow
that up by Subversion replacing the zero-byte file with the pristine copy.
What I would rather see is Eclipse having some kind of API we could call
to tell it that we were about to modifiy the file so that it could go grab
the current contents and record it in Local History.
Mark
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subclipse.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subclipse.tigris.org
Received on Tue Sep 26 14:51:13 2006