Where to populate Version Control entry

[Evgeniy Ivanov]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Andreas Pakulat wrote:
> 
> Version Control is for the most-often-used actions. We should try to
> keep that submenu small. As I said we might even want to remove the 2
> diff entries and make just one out of that.

Agree.

> 
> Uhm, IBasicVC::add adds a file to a vcs system, its not meant to add
> changes in a file to a commit - if the VCS system supports that. Thats
> something that needs to go into a different interface, presumly IDVCS.

Will move it. As we discussed in IRC, I don't like it, but agree we
write software for the end-user and have to do all things for end users.

>>> But as I said elsewhere already I'm not sure you need that, as it should
>>> be possible to do this implicitly using the commit-dialog.
>> It can be useful. If I did change I want to be committed with next
>> commit I would like to have add (rather then watching the full list in
>> commit dialog). Also it will be in commit dialog with "C" (cached), so
>> it will make my life better.
> 
> Well, personally I find it a lot easier to check the two or 3 files in
> the commit dialog, then having to remember which files I need to "add"
> to the commit before that. In fact in Eclipse I'm using the checkbox
> stuff all the time instead of the "add" to add new files to svn.
> 
> Anyway, if you want an action to add a file to the list of
> to-be-comitted changes you need a new action for that. "Add" is for
> IBasicVC add, which only adds unversioned files to the VCS. I'll make
> that clear in the api docs now.

Ok.

>>> Well, there's already an interface that allows creation of branches and
>>> tags. It might be specific to CentralizedVC systems right now, but it
>>> would be cool if we could make it workable for both types.
>> I will try to change branch manager to implement this interface. But I'm
>> not sure it's convenient for current branch manager.
> 
> Feel free to post patches or ideas as new mails.

I will :) A bit later, but I will.
I think I will be a bit offline during first two weeks of September
(will have to pass discrete math exam).


> Ok, here's the deal: Compare-to-HEAD only really makes sense with CVCS
> or when comparing a local git repo against a remote git repo from which
> you clone'd. Because the intention is to show what happened in HEAD -
> compared to your current working version. So this compare mode should
> even show differences if you don't have local modifications, but there
> have been changes in the repository which you didn't sync yet (i.e. last
> svn up is a while ago). I'd say this is something thats not used that
> often. Whats used pretty often though is to check the modifications you
> currently have on your disk - thats what svn diff does. It compares the
> file on disk and a local copy from your last svn up - thats Compare to
> BASE.
> 
> Hence I think we should have the "show local modifications" in the
> context menu, everything else can be done via a more complex "Diff..."
> action, which involves a revision-choosing-dialog to do the diff with.

Hm. I think we can have a look on what other IDEs have to compare.


- --
Cheers, Evgeniy.
Key fingerprint: F316 B5A1 F6D2 054F CD18 B74A 9540 0ABB 1FE5 67A3

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with SUSE - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAki1OL0ACgkQlUAKux/lZ6MMGQCeNWqy+GBlVBf3y9KZe+0+qmZI
3Q4AoK0kpuPp9zjSLZ4jBK3jF+Y0LCIN
=e/e2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----