RE: Re: Icon Overlay Caching Issue

>
> While I have nothing to offer in the way of a technical (never mind
> "official") explanation, I'm relatively certain that this issue has been
> bandied-about dozens of times on this list in the last year alone.

Okay - I searched around for it for a while before posting the question and didn't come upon anything that matched the situation we've found, so I apologize if I duplicated topics!

>
> While I do not speak for them, I am skeptical that the developers will
> have any interest in modifying the overlay caching implementation such
> that network drives are excluded by default. For everybody who feels the
> same way you do there will be somebody else who has a melt-down because
> network drive caching is "broken" out-of-the-box.

Understood - I don't think I was really envisioning a different default out-of-the-box behavior, but maybe something along the lines of "if you fill in the include box, the icon overlay will only look at the items you explicitly define, and, if you leave the include box blank, the default, it will look at everything" (and exclude box would behave as expected). I've seen that style of behavior in various other pieces of software - I certainly understand that you want it to work in a certain fashion for the vast majority of folks out of the box.

>
> With respect to the second issue, you could always modify the filesystem
> permissions such that each user does not have access to the other users'
> working copies. While that's not to say that this method is preferable,
> it's a short-term solution, provided that the users do not, in fact,
> have a need to access each others' working copies.
>

Thanks for the suggestion - we will look into doing this.

-Nick

------------------------------------------------------
http://tortoisesvn.tigris.org/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=4061&dsMessageId=3045359

To unsubscribe from this discussion, e-mail: [users-unsubscribe_at_tortoisesvn.tigris.org].
Received on 2013-01-22 22:45:35 CET