Add files/folders suggestions

[Thomas Linder Puls]

Hi there, I have a couple of suggestions for the "Add files/folders" dialog.

Let me first list the suggestions, and then explain them in details below:

• Choose between "Add Now" & "Add to change set" directly on the dialog
• Filter for relevant files
• Add folder non-recursive

"Add now" & "Add to change set"

I think it is a great thing that added files can go into the change set, rather that going directly into vault. That way I can add the files (to the change set) before I am really sure that the files should exist. So if I experimentally add some files to my program I can regret it again before doing and change to the repository. And if I decide the files should exist I will not accidentally forget to add them to the repository (which is one of the most common collaboration problems).

On the other hand, I often add some files to our test suite. These are files that I have created before "going near vault". So when I want to add such files, I am already 100% sure they are going to be added with their present contents. In this case the "delayed" adding just means that the adding operation is more tiresome, first I will have to add the files and then I will have to commit the adding.

I know there is some setting that chose between one way of adding and the other, but as you can see this is a dynamic choice for me.

Filter for relevant files

I guess this is pretty obvious (especially since SourceSafe has such filters). Sometimes the list of possible files to add is very large, and therefore it would be nice if the list could be filtered.

Especially there is one thing the you could always filter out: Files that are already added, but not yet commited. It is much nicer to to see the files than being told afterwards that they are already added.

Add folder non-recursive

Sometimes I want to add a folder, but not necessarily all files and sub-folders. I can of course "create" the folder instead, but then I have to type in the name (and get the spelling correct).

SourceSafe only add files from the "relevant" file filter, which is (sometimes) better than just adding all files. But I think that it is very dynamic, which files are relevant. So I am not sure that this is a good way to deal with it. I think it is better to be able to add the folder, and then add selected files and sub-folders to it, and so forth.

[dan]

Thanks for the suggestions Thomas. We are already planning your 2nd two requests in 2.1.

The first one (allowing users to dynamically choose whether Add happens immediately, or goes into the change set), really should apply to all commands, rather than just the Add command. But, this would cause the dialogs to require more options.

I'll add it as a feature request, and we'll see if other people request it too.

Thanks again,

[Thomas Linder Puls]

Nice.

I will suggest two buttons rather than an option in the dialogs.

We find the "move" (or rename for that matter) command "difficult". It works very fine for those peoples that receives the move from vault. But it is problematic for the person that wants to enter it into vault.

The problem is while the move is pending in vault, vault still acts as if the files are in the old place. But the person that is moving the files is obviously interested in having the files in the new place.

I believe that "Get latest" receives the old files again and that "needs merge" does not at all work (i.e. towards the new files).

Moving files is very often not something that you can do atomically, because after the files have been moved you normally have to correct references to the files (for example include statements). First when all references have been corrected to the new files you are ready to commit.

During the the phase where you correct references you are not interested in receiving the old files again, because that might result in some references notbeing corrected. Also during that phase you are interested in merging the changes to the "old" files into the "new" files.

In generel you can say that any change I have in my pending change set should look committed to me.

(This is just like in an SQL database, the changes that you have made but not committed are active for you).

[ericsink]

We find the "move" (or rename for that matter) command "difficult".

...

In generel you can say that any change I have in my pending change set should look committed to me.

I happen to agree with you on this. Vault obviously does not work the way you describe, but I rather think that it should. Renames, deletes and moves should already be done in the working folder at the time they are committed.

Note that I'm not making a specific promise to change the behavior. I'm just agreeing with you in principle. We would need to review the impact of this change before making any commitments.