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

Re: [Subclipse-users] Subclipse and the out of date folders feature, more to say?

From: Mark Phippard <markphip_at_gmail.com>
Date: 2006-12-24 15:15:57 CET

On 12/24/06, MATHUS Baptiste <mathus.b@mipih.fr> wrote:
> I was going to comment on your blog on this entry : http://markphip.blogspot.com/2006/12/subclipse-synchronize-feature-show-out.html
> but then I thought I'd certainly be interesting to discuss it here
> instead.
> Subclipse now lets you directly see what folders should be updated. In
> fact, I agree with Mark that it's certainly a lot better this way. At least,
> it permits to immediately remember that an update should be done.
> Wouldn't it be interesting to add some related feature to this: add an
> option to automatically run update after a commit? I would personnally
> really be interested into having such feature. Moreover, I can't see a use
> case where someone would be interested in not running update after any
> commit to be up to date. Is there any thing I'm missing about it? If there
> is no interest in not running this update, why not rename/change the actual
> option to "automatically run update after commit"?
> If you agree with the interest of such a feature, but have no time in
> implenting this, I could try and cope with subclipse code to add this. But
> as you already said, Mark, it's better agreeing on a subject with the
> subclipse developers when working on patch, so as not to work for nothing
> :).

<file:///C:/eclipse-3.2.1/eclipse.ini>I would be interested to hear what
others think. Personally, I am very much against it. It violates the
push/pull philosophy of Subversion as expressed here in the Subversion book
(look for the heading "Updates and Commits are Separate"):


I think there are plenty of negatives that can come from it, namely that
other changes have been committed since you initiated the Synchronize, and
now you receive unexpected updates in your working copy. The other issue is
that you would not have an obvious "target" for the update command.
Meaning, I do not think you could just update the project root, and if not
that, then what would you choose to update? Updating the files that were
committed would not be of any value, and if you do not update to the project
root, then you haven't accomplished what seems to be the goal in doing this
in the first place.


Mark Phippard
Received on Sun Dec 24 15:16:04 2006

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

This site is subject to the Apache Privacy Policy and the Apache Public Forum Archive Policy.