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

Re: After update file still on list

From: Stefan Küng <tortoisesvn_at_gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 16:05:58 +0100

David Balažic wrote:
> Stefan Küng wrote:
>> David Balažic wrote:
>>> Stefan Küng wrote:
>>>> David Balažic wrote:
>>>>> Stefan Küng wrote:
>>>>>> David Balažic wrote:
>>>>>>> Stefan Küng wrote:
>>>>>>>> David Balažic wrote:
>>>>>>>>> TortoiseSVN 32-bit
>>>>>>>>> In the "check for Modifications" windows, an remotely
>>>>>> modified file
>>>>>>>>> does not disappear from the list, after calling Update on it.
>>>>>>>> Hit F5 to refresh the view.
>>>>>>> No, that removes all remote changes. Then I have to click
>>>>>> again "Check repository" to get them back.
>>>>>>> I also noticed now, that localy changed files also do not
>>>>>> disappear from the list after bein commited.
>>>>>>> I vaguelly remember that they did so in previous versions...
>>>>>> Nope, that never worked that way.
>>>>>> Because: how would the CfM dialog even know that an
>>>>>> update/commit/whatever was successful? That is done in a
>>>>>> separate thread.
>>>>> And communication between threads will be invented only
>>>> next year ;-)
>>>>> I know this is not 5 minutes of work... I program myself.
>>>> After you update a folder or a file, what status does it have
>>>> (assuming the update was successful)?
>>> "up-to-date" (that is : no remote changes)
>> Nope. Well, the *remote* status would be 'normal', yes. But what would
>> the local text and property status be? Could be 'normal', could be
>> 'conflicted', could be 'modified', could be ...
> Yes. If the user would modify it the same time he is updating it.
> Which is done very rarely.

Instead of trying to prove my arguments wrong, please do all of us a
favor and *think* first about what I wrote.
Your argument is completely wrong, and if you ever had a conflict after
an update you would know it (and from your other mails I get that you
already *have* had a conflict after an update).

> Afterall why are reverted files removed from the list ?

Didn't I just tell you that in my very first answer? If you can't
remember what I wrote half an hour ago, then at least re-read the mails

> The code is following two logics here, without any explanation, why is one good
> in one case, and the other in other case.

I gave you an explanation why.


  oo  // \\      "De Chelonian Mobile"
 (_,\/ \_/ \     TortoiseSVN
   \ \_/_\_/>    The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
   /_/   \_\     http://tortoisesvn.net
To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].

Received on 2009-03-06 16:06:28 CET

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

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