2009/9/28 Rafael M. Heise <rmheise_at_gmail.com>:
> I have thinking about somethings that maybe we could see in
> 1. Temporary local files. I don't know about you all guys, but
> sometimes I just create some temporary files and these files are only
> local files. I don't want commit these files and I don't want to add
> these files on ignore-list and submit that. These files are only
> temporary, e.g specific configuration files created to test a
> software. I need keep these files for a long time, while I'm coding
> and waiting for a answer from the customer. These files appears on the
> commit file list and I can't add these files in the ignore-on-commit
> list just because these files are not versioned. So, I have thinking
> about and I would suggest to allow adds these files (not versioned) on
> the ignore-on-commit list.
You can't use the ignore-on-commit list because that feature uses the
underlying subversion changelist feature which is onl;y for versioned
files. Maybe there is some other way.
> 2. Sometime ago I had a situation where I were coding and the other
> developer needs to compile the project. But a commit made by me don't
> allowed him to compile the project. My commit needs some changes on
> database and on that moment the customer couldn't do the changes. So,
> we decided to "update to revision", but we would like to "update to
> revision" only the files modified in the specific revision (the
> revision commited by me). I tried to do that on "Log Dialog", but I
> only could "update to revision" if I "update to revision" all files
> modified from HEAD until the specific revision. As I said, I only
> wanted "update to revision" a few files, not all files. I can do it if
> I "update to revision" file by file. I would suggest to add a new
> feature on "Log Dialog" to allow "update to revision" only the files
> selected or only the files modified in a specific revision. I know,
> maybe these files was changed after, and couldn't compile if I undo
> the modifications. But I think when someone "update to revision"
> somefile, this person know what could happens. I only "update to
> revision" when I know what I want. To me, "update to revision" is not
> an habitual task.
Why don't you use 'revert changes from this revision' in the log
dialog? That will do exactly what you need, although it leaves those
files in a modified state, so you have to be careful not to commit
them by accident.
: 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 2009-09-28 10:26:04 CEST