"Eric J. Smith" <eric@ericjsmith.net> wrote on 07/08/2005 12:47:23 PM:
> Agreed. The SCC API is crap and I for one wouldn't be interested in a
> Subversion plugin that uses the SCC API (although I've heard that the
VS.NET
> 2005 version of the API is MUCH improved). I'd like to see a plugin
that
> lets me work in the Subversion style and makes extensive use of the
> incredible work that Stephan and others have done with TSVN.
You know I hadn't really thought of it that way. My thinking was always
that integration means SCC, and that means locking. Now that 1.2 allows
you to setup Subversion to "require" locking, I was thinking SCC would be
more possible. However, you are right. The ideal would be an integration
that supported the Subversion style of development. If you choose to do
locking it would support that, but it would without it.
The only problem in the "grand scheme" of things is that means targeting
just VS.NET 2003 and later. SCC could support a lot of tools. If we
could get really, really good VS.NET integration, it would be worth
sacrificing.
In my opinion, if it does not include any status information, and does not
capture file events in the IDE, then it is hard to call it integration.
Mark
_____________________________________________________________________________
Scanned for SoftLanding Systems, Inc. by IBM Email Security Management Services powered by MessageLabs.
_____________________________________________________________________________
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@tortoisesvn.tigris.org
Received on Fri Jul 8 19:45:49 2005