The "Detect new files" feature does not support folders. The reason is that you have poblems with GUI.
I think I can solve that problem for you.
The solution is in line with another suggestion I have made.
The suggestion is that Vault should always act for me as if the "Pending Change Set" is committed. A move in Vault should move on my disk, a Delete in Vault should delete from my disk, etc.
Now if we extend this to "Add" then you will have the following.
In the "Detect ..." form the left pane shows the folders in my repository, in he right hand I see missing files and folders. The folders in the right pane cannot be expaded.
But when I "Add" a folder it immediatly appears in the left pane (because to me all actions looks committed). Now I can select that node in the left pane and see files and folders in the right.
There could of course also be an "Add Recursively" button. And perhaps an "Add Folders Recursively".
Detect ... and folders
Moderator: SourceGear
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2004 2:28 am
- Location: PDC, Copenhagen Denmark
- Contact:
Detect ... and folders
Thomas Linder Puls
Visual Prolog www.visual-prolog.com
Visual Prolog www.visual-prolog.com
-
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2004 2:28 am
- Location: PDC, Copenhagen Denmark
- Contact:
I know about the "Commit Immediately", but in general I prefer to postpone the commit.
I have however already suggested, that it is not a "setting". But a choice that is given in the Add dialog (etc).
I.e. in the "Add" dialog there should be two buttons:
But a new source files should be added to the Pending Change Set, because such a file should not be committed before it has the proper contents.
I have however already suggested, that it is not a "setting". But a choice that is given in the Add dialog (etc).
I.e. in the "Add" dialog there should be two buttons:
- Add (to Pending Change Set)
- Add and Commit immediately
But a new source files should be added to the Pending Change Set, because such a file should not be committed before it has the proper contents.
Thomas Linder Puls
Visual Prolog www.visual-prolog.com
Visual Prolog www.visual-prolog.com
I like Thomas' suggestion that actions in the Pending Changeset look like they are already committed in the rest of the GUI, and that they affect the files currently in the working directory.
Well perhaps they shouldn't entirely look like they're already committed in the GUI. I'd rather have a status that says "Deleted" or "Moved" until the action is committed. However, it would be nice to have an "Added" status for files and folders, and be able to add a folder and files to that folder in the same commit.
Having the pending actions also reflected in the working directory is also really good, as it allows the changes to be tested before they are checked in (ie build w/o that deleted file). This also implies that a Get Latest operation respect those operations, ie a pending rename should get the old file name to the new name, a pending deleted file should not be gotten even if it is changed (or perhaps it requires a merge?).
I realize this is a big change and probably affects a lot of internals. For 1 thing it requires that actions in the pending changeset occur in a particular order as, for example, a file could be renamed and then modified in the same commit.
However it is a nice paradigm and I think worthwhile exploring for the future.
Mike
Well perhaps they shouldn't entirely look like they're already committed in the GUI. I'd rather have a status that says "Deleted" or "Moved" until the action is committed. However, it would be nice to have an "Added" status for files and folders, and be able to add a folder and files to that folder in the same commit.
Having the pending actions also reflected in the working directory is also really good, as it allows the changes to be tested before they are checked in (ie build w/o that deleted file). This also implies that a Get Latest operation respect those operations, ie a pending rename should get the old file name to the new name, a pending deleted file should not be gotten even if it is changed (or perhaps it requires a merge?).
I realize this is a big change and probably affects a lot of internals. For 1 thing it requires that actions in the pending changeset occur in a particular order as, for example, a file could be renamed and then modified in the same commit.
However it is a nice paradigm and I think worthwhile exploring for the future.
Mike