RE: WinCvs install script and MarkResolved macro

> >I started playing around a bit with the install script, trying your
> >idea of creating an unselected component for "obsolete macros".
> >(snip)
> >If you want I could commit the macro stuff already.
> 
> Sure, why not - when it comes to macros *you* are definately 
> in charge ;)

OK, I'll commit as soon as I've got the two new macros ready, so I won't 
have to commit twice... ;)
That's of course the (little) drawback of maintaining distinct groups of 
installable macros from the same source directory. The file names now 
have to be explicitly specified in the installer, so one has to make 
sure none are missed...

 
> I was already thinking about that. We can have "bare" WinCvs 
> install without
> any CVSNT files and we don't really have to worry about specifying the
> location of CVSNT all that much because WinCvs preferences offers the
> setting for that already.
> 
> All we really need is the way to direct the user to properly set the
> "Alternative CVS executable". We can do that in the install 
> script but I
> think it's easier and better to add the check in the WinCvs 
> itself and at
> the start simply check whether the CVS executable is present 
> and either
> print the warning message or perhaps even open the 
> preferences with the
> cursor nicely blinking in the right place ;)

Good idea. We should hold back the "bare" installer until that is 
implemented, though.

 
> I would skip the scanning for conflict markers - it's 
> entirely possible that
> file contains a legitimate content that looks like markers. 

I'd rather leave it in so I don't accidentally mark a file as resolved 
that isn't at least 99% sure to be so (there could of course in theory 
be unresolved conflicts without conflict markers if the person doing the 
resolving just removed the markers but not the conflict). I'm actually 
still thinking of removing the recursive mechanism, so as to make it an 
even more conscious action: only explicitly selected files will be 
marked as resolved - in that case I could probably skip the 
marker-scanning indeed.


> The timestamp
> comparison against the file modification time should be 
> enought. And much
> faster too.

I only scan for markers if the modification time differs from the 
conflict time and I also only scan files that report a conflict to start 
with. That must be sufficient in terms of optimization.


> Please keep in mind that the macro will end up in "obsolete macros"
> eventually because we ought to incorporate the resolved 
> conflicts indication
> into GUI itself.

I'd really like to see that (I did not file that RFE for nothing after 
all ;) ). When implementing this, you should however keep in mind:

- the indicator should not be labeled "Resolved" but rather "Resolving" 
or something like that - only files that were consciously marked as 
resolved by the user should be labeled thus.

- introducing the "Resolving" state must also result in the exclusion of 
the "Conflict" state from the group of Committable states for the 
filters: CVS will *not* allow you to commit "real" conflict files.


> On the second thought - in case you got some code on that 
> already

I have. The macro is basically done.


> - the
> scanning for conflict markers isn't such a bad idea. It may 
> be quite usefull
> to have the macro scanning for these and reporting the files 
> containg them
> but without the modifications to entries file. It could be 
> called "Search
> CVS Conflict markers" or something similiar.

Good idea. I'll add that. It could actually be handled by the same macro 
(or at least the same base class). It would basically be a "simulated" 
run of the macro I have now with slightly reworded reports. Do you think 
that version of the macro should scan files that are not reported as 
having conflicts (by the Entries API) as well?

Cheers,

Oliver
----	------------------
JID:	[email protected]
ICQ:	18777742	(http://wwp.icq.com/18777742)


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/NhFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[email protected]

 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/