Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 01:07 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: If the principle way is ok I can do the same for the RCS and SVN backend too. One question regarding the View log button of repoUpdate: here on Mac the dialog to display the log is unusable. It is blocked by the next

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: I made a new patch to implement getDiff() and use it to avoid the query for log message before checkIn() is done and the confirmation on revert when no diff is found. thanks for your patience, i went closely through the

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 15:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: @@ -212,8 +213,9 @@ docstring text = bformat(_(Reverting to the stored version of the document %1$s will lose all current changes.\n\n

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 15:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: While doing some stress test with checkIn() I found the error message when merge is needed Something's wrong with cvs commit not acceptable. Then I tried to change that and

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: the error case is suspicious. if tempName fails or cvs diff fails how you detect this on a higher stage? cmiiw but if something fails you identify it with having empty diff, which looks wrong, even more if you release lock automatically in such a case...

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 01:07 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: If the principle way is ok I can do the same for the RCS and SVN backend too. One question regarding the "View log" button of repoUpdate: here on Mac the dialog to display the log is unusable. It

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> I made a new patch to implement getDiff() and use it to avoid the query for >> log message >> before checkIn() is done and the confirmation on revert when no diff is >> found. > > thanks for your patience, i went closely

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 15:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: > Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > >> Stephan Witt wrote: >> >>> @@ -212,8 +213,9 @@ >>> docstring text = bformat(_("Reverting to the stored version of the " >>> "document %1$s will lose all current >>>

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 22.10.2010 um 15:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: > Am 22.10.2010 um 02:11 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > >> Stephan Witt wrote: > While doing some "stress test" with checkIn() I found the error message when > merge is needed > "Something's wrong with cvs commit" not acceptable. Then I tried to change >

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > > the error case is suspicious. if tempName fails or "cvs diff" fails how you > > detect > > this on a higher stage? cmiiw but if something fails you identify it with > > having > > empty diff, which looks wrong, even more if you release lock automatically > > in such > >

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: If the principle way is ok I can do the same for the RCS and SVN backend too. One question regarding the View log button of repoUpdate: here on Mac the dialog to display the log is unusable. It is blocked by the next confirmation dialog. Is this platform

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: I made a new patch to implement getDiff() and use it to avoid the query for log message before checkIn() is done and the confirmation on revert when no diff is found. thanks for your patience, i went closely through the patch now and generally liked the approach.

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > >> If the principle way is ok I can do the same for the RCS and SVN backend > >> too. > >> > >> One question regarding the "View log" button of repoUpdate: > >> here on Mac the dialog to display the log is unusable. > >> It is blocked by the next confirmation dialog. >

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > I made a new patch to implement getDiff() and use it to avoid the query for > log message > before checkIn() is done and the confirmation on revert when no diff is found. thanks for your patience, i went closely through the patch now and generally liked the approach. >

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for different issues, its much harder to keep

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> Pavel, can you have a look please? > > hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful > if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for > different > issues, its much harder

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for different

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 15:10 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner -

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > > > Stephan Witt wrote: > >> Pavel, can you have a look please? > > > > hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful > > if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for > >

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 15:10 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: >> >>> Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? >>> >>> hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful >>> if we can proceed in usual

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 17.10.2010 um 21:00 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 15.10.2010 um 21:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Pavel Sanda wrote: this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). #6396 Ok, thanks. An attempt to attack it (together with repoUpdate

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for different issues, its much harder to keep your track if everything is muddled into one big

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for different issues, its much harder to keep

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 17.10.2010 um 21:00 schrieb Stephan Witt: > Am 15.10.2010 um 21:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: > >> Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: >> >>> Pavel Sanda wrote: this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). >>> >>> #6396 >> >> Ok, thanks. > > An attempt to attack it (together

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > Pavel, can you have a look please? hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for different issues, its much harder to keep your track if everything is muddled into one big

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 19.10.2010 um 03:34 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >> Pavel, can you have a look please? > > hopefully towards the end of this week. actually it would be really helpful > if we can proceed in usual incremental manner - different patches for > different > issues, its much harder

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 21:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Pavel Sanda wrote: this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). #6396 Ok, thanks. An attempt to attack it (together with repoUpdate implementation) is attached... I tried to make the

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 21:28 schrieb Stephan Witt: > Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > >> Pavel Sanda wrote: >>> this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). >> >> #6396 > > Ok, thanks. An attempt to attack it (together with repoUpdate implementation) is attached... I tried to make

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: The owner_ variable points to the buffer, of course. Most of the time VC implementation uses the filename of the buffer. But I cannot see what sense the file_ variable of the VC instance has. intuitively the meaning is clear - when possible use owner. when buffer

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: i quickly went through sources and saw also few usage of file_ outside scanMaster in svn routines which looks inconsitent and owner_ would be more appropriate. no as i see it again they are part of scanMaster so the question really is whether this routine can be called

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 15:08 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Pavel Sanda wrote: i quickly went through sources and saw also few usage of file_ outside scanMaster in svn routines which looks inconsitent and owner_ would be more appropriate. no as i see it again they are part of scanMaster so the question

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: But in general owner_-fileName() should be used instead of file_. yes Another question: when the working copy has no diff to repository the check in operation isn't sensible. But it's expensive to test this. So I'd like to test it before prompting for the log message and

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). #6396

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Pavel Sanda wrote: this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). #6396 Ok, thanks. Stephan

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > The owner_ variable "points" to the buffer, of course. > Most of the time VC implementation uses the filename of the buffer. > But I cannot see what sense the file_ variable of the VC instance has. intuitively the meaning is clear - when possible use owner. when buffer

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: > i quickly went through sources and saw also few usage of file_ outside > scanMaster in svn routines which looks inconsitent and owner_ would be > more appropriate. no as i see it again they are part of scanMaster so the question really is whether this routine can be called

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 15:08 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Pavel Sanda wrote: >> i quickly went through sources and saw also few usage of file_ outside >> scanMaster in svn routines which looks inconsitent and owner_ would be >> more appropriate. > > no as i see it again they are part of scanMaster so the

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > But in general owner_->fileName() should be used instead of file_. yes > Another question: when the working copy has no diff to repository > the check in operation isn't sensible. But it's expensive to test > this. So I'd like to test it before prompting for the log message

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: > this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). #6396

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 15.10.2010 um 18:00 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Pavel Sanda wrote: >> this is already bug #chrrm (bugzilla is down). > > #6396 Ok, thanks. Stephan

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 16:37 schrieb Stephan Witt: Am 08.10.2010 um 16:19 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution would be to push this conde into lyxvc. I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) can you move it please?

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: Yes, I do it when working on the backport of my changes. I have a general question about the VCBackend code. The CVS and SVN classes have a file_ member variable. Am I right that this is the reference to the owner_ file? Most of the time the file of the owner_ is used

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 14.10.2010 um 22:43 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: Yes, I do it when working on the backport of my changes. I have a general question about the VCBackend code. The CVS and SVN classes have a file_ member variable. Am I right that this is the reference to the owner_ file? Most

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 16:37 schrieb Stephan Witt: > Am 08.10.2010 um 16:19 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > >> Stephan Witt wrote: but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution would be to push this conde into lyxvc. >>> >>> I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) >>

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > > Yes, I do it when working on the backport of my changes. > > I have a general question about the VCBackend code. > The CVS and SVN classes have a file_ member variable. > Am I right that this is the reference to the owner_ file? > Most of the time the file of the owner_ is

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 14.10.2010 um 22:43 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >>> Yes, I do it when working on the backport of my changes. >> >> I have a general question about the VCBackend code. >> The CVS and SVN classes have a file_ member variable. >> Am I right that this is the reference to the owner_

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

On 08/10/2010 15:58, Edwin Leuven wrote: Pavel Sandasa...@lyx.org wrote: this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. i always like abdel's ideas... Thanks ;-) The advantage of git (or any other distributed vcs) is of course that you don't need a server. The full

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: On Windows we could package git.exe with the installer easily, like we do for python. maybe even include some subset in our sources as we do with boost... we shouldn't be dependent on the development of git tools to be able to read our own files... pavel

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

On 08/10/2010 15:58, Edwin Leuven wrote: Pavel Sanda wrote: this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. i always like abdel's ideas... Thanks ;-) The advantage of git (or any other distributed vcs) is of course that you don't need a server. The

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Abdelrazak Younes wrote: > On Windows we could package git.exe with the installer easily, like we do > for python. maybe even include some subset in our sources as we do with boost... we shouldn't be dependent on the development of git tools to be able to read our own files... pavel

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

sw...@lyx.org wrote: Author: switt Date: Fri Oct 8 07:40:16 2010 New Revision: 35575 URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/35575 Log: add implementation for CVS::checkOut few comments... string CVS::checkOut() { - // cvs update or perhaps for cvs this should be a noop -

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 14:06 schrieb Pavel Sanda: sw...@lyx.org wrote: Author: switt Date: Fri Oct 8 07:40:16 2010 New Revision: 35575 URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/35575 Log: add implementation for CVS::checkOut few comments... string CVS::checkOut() { -// cvs update

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: + // to be sure we test it again... + if (!checkOutEnabled()) + return string(); why we are not sure here? we should be consistent in all routines. Because it is not sure if the checkout is enabled when doing the checkout. You test the enabled state

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

it would be nice to have the possibility to store the zipped svn repository of the lyx document itself in the lyx file. it would be activated with a store history item in the menu just like we have compressed now. when opening this document lyx would unzip the repository in the tempdir, and

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: don't know whether this makes sense, but i would use it... this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. the only difference was to use git for it. it would also solve embedded format feature... i have no time for this project though. pavel

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org wrote: this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. i always like abdel's ideas... i have no time for this project though. pity could we add this to http://www.lyx.org/Donate and announce it on lyx-users? i could make a first contribution to get it

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 15:35 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: + // to be sure we test it again... + if (!checkOutEnabled()) + return string(); why we are not sure here? we should be consistent in all routines. Because it is not sure if the checkout is enabled when doing the

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: i have no time for this project though. pity btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... could we add this to http://www.lyx.org/Donate and announce it on lyx-users? i think before we offer something we should know who is

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution would be to push this conde into lyxvc. I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) can you move it please? Where is the conflict? The conflict is when more than one user is changing the *same

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org wrote: btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... i wouldn't give me a single file with the history, and i would need to use svn. right? i think before we offer something we should know who is responsible for coding it once we collect

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: Pavel Sanda sa...@lyx.org wrote: btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... i wouldn't give me a single file with the history, and i would need to use svn. right? no. you need to have gnu rcs installed (http://www.gnu.org/software/rcs/).

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 16:19 schrieb Pavel Sanda: Stephan Witt wrote: but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution would be to push this conde into lyxvc. I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) can you move it please? Yes, I do it when working on the backport of

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

sw...@lyx.org wrote: > Author: switt > Date: Fri Oct 8 07:40:16 2010 > New Revision: 35575 > URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/35575 > > Log: > add implementation for CVS::checkOut few comments... > > > string CVS::checkOut() > { > - // cvs update or perhaps for cvs this should

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 14:06 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > sw...@lyx.org wrote: >> Author: switt >> Date: Fri Oct 8 07:40:16 2010 >> New Revision: 35575 >> URL: http://www.lyx.org/trac/changeset/35575 >> >> Log: >> add implementation for CVS::checkOut > > few comments... > >> >> >> string

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > >> + // to be sure we test it again... > >> + if (!checkOutEnabled()) > >> + return string(); > > > > why we are not sure here? we should be consistent in all routines. > > Because it is not sure if the checkout is enabled when doing the checkout. > You test the

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

it would be nice to have the possibility to store the zipped svn repository of the lyx document itself in the lyx file. it would be activated with a "store history" item in the menu just like we have "compressed" now. when opening this document lyx would unzip the repository in the tempdir, and

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: > don't know whether this makes sense, but i would use it... this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. the only difference was to use git for it. it would also solve embedded format feature... i have no time for this project though. pavel

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: > this makes big sense and was already proposed by Abdel. i always like abdel's ideas... > i have no time for this project though. pity could we add this to http://www.lyx.org/Donate and announce it on lyx-users? i could make a first contribution to get it

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 15:35 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: + // to be sure we test it again... + if (!checkOutEnabled()) + return string(); >>> >>> why we are not sure here? we should be consistent in all routines. >> >> Because it is not sure if the checkout is

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: > > i have no time for this project though. > > pity btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... > could we add this to > > http://www.lyx.org/Donate > > and announce it on lyx-users? > i think before we offer something we should know who is

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Stephan Witt wrote: > > but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution > > would be to push > > this conde into lyxvc. > > I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) can you move it please? > Where is the conflict? > > The conflict is when more than one user is changing

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Pavel Sanda wrote: > btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... i wouldn't give me a single file with the history, and i would need to use svn. right? > i think before we offer something we should know who is responsible for coding > it once we

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Edwin Leuven wrote: > Pavel Sanda wrote: > > btw for single files only, this sort of works already when you use RCS... > > i wouldn't give me a single file with the history, and i would need to > use svn. right? no. you need to have gnu rcs installed

Re: r35575 - lyx-devel/trunk/src

Am 08.10.2010 um 16:19 schrieb Pavel Sanda: > Stephan Witt wrote: >>> but i still dont like we dont care about this consitently. the solution >>> would be to push >>> this conde into lyxvc. >> >> I wouldn't vote against such move. :-) > > can you move it please? Yes, I do it when working on