Hi Erich and Rick,
I'm not sure that this is a good idea.
Mark & Oliver we're overhauling ooDialog, and as I recall, Mark deprecated
a lot of what most users would consider basic ooDialog fuctionality in the
latest release or perhaps last few releases.
This means that if my memory serves me right, at the point that Mark was no
longer able to work:
1) A lot of written code will not run with the newest version
2) The overhaul was not complete, so there may be bits of old and bits of
new in there
3) I'm not sure how complete the documentation is
I think it might be safer if we can do it to work out a way that users can
choose a version of ooDialog to use with 5.0.0, because the changes needed
to legacy code were not small.
Using a ComboBox control as an example the 'new' userdialog class had
methods named like 'CreateComboBox' where the old userdialog class had
methods named like 'addComboBox'. The old methods would not run in the new
version. Proxies were obtained in the old userdialog with methods name
'getComboBox' and in the new userdialog with methods named like
'newComboBox'.
A considerable number of helper classes were introduced where the previous
functionality had been 'under the covers'.
All in all,it increased the power of ooDialog and ironed out a lot of
historic irregularities, but migration required some considerable work.
I'm not sure without checking at which version the change happened, but I
will try to research it over the next couple of days and get back to you on
this.
Jon
On Tue, 28 Aug 2018 at 21:23, Rick McGuire <object.r...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 28, 2018 at 3:26 PM Erich Steinböck <
> erich.steinbo...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm thinking of integrating the latest standalone ooDialog code into
>> main/trunk for 5.0.
>>
>> ooDialog standalone code (which should be 4.2.4 with some delta to the
>> last released 4.2.4 standalone-preview) has not yet been branched and is
>> still nmake-based (not CMake). I do not intend to convert / maintain it,
>> but I'm thinking of merging the 4.2.4 trunk back into main/trunk. ooDialog
>> docs in main/trunk are already at the 4.2.4 level, while main/trunk
>> ooDialog code is still at 4.2.3.
>>
>
> I think this is a good idea.
>
>
>>
>> Merging will have to be done carefully, because different changes seem to
>> have been made to both trunks.
>>
>> What's the suggested SVN command to merge back ooDialog-standalone code
>> into main/trunk, keeping its SVN revision history?
>>
>
> I used this guide when I did the merge:
>
> http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.7/svn.branchmerge.basicmerging.html
>
> The first step of merging changes back into the trunk seemed to miss
> updates on some files, and the pattern made no sense, such as missing
> portions of individual commits. I never figured out what the problem was,
> but I had to fix up a lot of things manually. I found it useful to do an
> SVN diff between the two branches and take a close look at the deltas to
> make sure that nothing was getting backed out from the trunk version when
> the merge happened. It helped that I was familiar with all of the changes,
> not a luxury we have with the oodialog code.
>
> I don't know if this is a factor or not, but that branch is very old and
> the newer SVN branch merge features might predate that branch getting
> taken, so it might not have all of the information used for tracking the
> merges. It might be impossible to keep the revision history.
>
> There's a lot of information available by doing "svn help merge".
>
>
>>
>> Rick, you said SVN gave you fits, when you merged the "address with"
>> changes back into trunk .. what are the pitfalls to avoid?
>>
>
> SVN diff is your friend for double checking that something is not
> accidentally backed of. Generate an SVN diff for both branches so you know
> what the state of everything is before you start merging, then use that
> information to double check everything before committing.
>
> Rick
>
>
>>
>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
>> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
>> _______________________________________________
>> Oorexx-devel mailing list
>> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
> engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
> _______________________________________________
> Oorexx-devel mailing list
> Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Check out the vibrant tech community on one of the world's most
engaging tech sites, Slashdot.org! http://sdm.link/slashdot
_______________________________________________
Oorexx-devel mailing list
Oorexx-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/oorexx-devel
