Your postings are not related to my second point of division between the ipr and iws.
To me both of the points are important. "Jacques Morel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message ak1nc8$c7f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:ak1nc8$c7f$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > I filed 2 SCRs related to this. > http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=2543 > http://www.intellij.net/tracker/idea/viewSCR?publicId=2544 > > "Ilya Kharmatsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > ak07ev$qh0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:ak07ev$qh0$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > +10 > > "Amnon I. Govrin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message > > aju5oi$ame$[EMAIL PROTECTED]">news:aju5oi$ame$[EMAIL PROTECTED]... > > > Hi. > > > > > > We are using an IntelliJ project file that is checked into SourceSafe > and > > > thus is read-only most of the times. > > > > > > A few requests: > > > 1. To be able to turn off that "Cannot save project. Project file is > > > read-only." message that pops up all the time (it didn't exist in 2.6). > > > 2. Divide the information between the .ipr and .iws so that .iws > contains > > > only user specific settings. Under this guideline, the running/debugging > > > entries should be moved from the .iws to the .ipr. > > > > > > These 2 points will have the following advantages: > > > 1. Check in only .ipr files > > > 2. Be able to leave the .ipr checked in and change it rarely (only when > > new > > > source directories are added, new running entries are added, etc.). > > > > > > Please??? :-) > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Amnon > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Eap-features mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.jetbrains.com/mailman/listinfo/eap-features
