Re: Feedback/experiences on PushOK SVN

Erik Hemdal wrote:
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Georg Viehöver [mailto:viehoever@sigma-c.de]
>>
>> We tried it, but later dropped it because mapping
>> SCC-Behaviour to SVN-Behaviour is not trivial, and is not
>> properly handled by PushOk (I dont even know if it is really
>> possible).
>>
I think it is possible, if you can subsist on a slightly less than
perfect mapping. For instance, "checkout" and "get" (and ironically
"uncheckout") would do pretty much the same thing in a subversion
environment. A user can probably get used to that.

So far I've had more issues with how VisualStudio (my SCC client) uses
SCC than I have had with SCC itself. For instance, the most logical
mapping for a typical editable source file would be to a "checked out"
file in SCC. However, every file will be considered checked out if you
do that, which means every single file shows up bolded and checked in
VisualStudio's File View. That looks gaudy, and doesn't really help the
user much.

 From a user perspective, "this file has been locally modified and will
need to be put back into the baseline at some point" is the information
they are looking for. This maps to "checked out" in SourceSafe (and thus
SCC), but to "locally modified" (technically, svn_wc_status_modified)
with subversion. So we map locally modified SVN files to SCC's "checked
out" status.

-- 
T.E.D.   Work     -  mailto:dennison@ssd.fsi.com
         Home     -  mailto:dennison@telepath.com (Yahoo: Ted_Dennison)
         Homepage -  http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@subversion.tigris.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@subversion.tigris.org