Simon Large wrote:
> SteveKing wrote:
>
>>Will Dean wrote:
>>
>>>Yes, it's a lousy half-baked feature, so perhaps having a lousy
>>>half-baked name for it is actually appropriate.
>>
>>I don't think it's a half baked feature, and I definitely don't think
>>it's lousy. It does what it is intended for: it shows the user what to
>>expect in a merge.
>
>
> There is really not much else you could expect it to do. If you want to
> see an actual preview it would have to modify the files for real. It
> might be possible to do something with temp files for a small merge, but
> it's equally possible that a merge could change every file in your WC.
> Listing the changed and conflicted files seems the best solution to me.
> If nothing else it is a good check that you have actually picked the
> right revision numbers.
I think the name dry run is ok, but then i never use it so my opinion on
the name probably doesn't count for much. I don't see the point in
knowing which files will be updated without knowing what changes will be
made to them.
Wheneven i do a merge i make sure i don't have any local changes in my
WC, do the merge, and then use Check for Mods to see what happened, if
the merge didn't do what i expected then all i have to do is revert
everything and try again.
Nathan
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jan 21 00:28:48 2005