Re: Can't mark pbxproj as resolved
I'd say about 85% of the time when I have file(s) in conflict, not only will Versions not be able to resolve the conflict, but usually it won't even display that there are files in conflict. I have to go back to the command line to resolve the conflicts, then Versions will work as normal. Of course, since I have to go to the command line to do switches, merges, and conflict resolution, and since I find that since versions only reliably does svn up or svn commit I just use the command line instead. Shan On Feb 21, 9:19 am, Ali Elhajj elhaj...@gmail.com wrote: I am unable to commit the project.pbxproj file. The file is shown as added in SVN. i cannot commit it and I cannot mark it as resolved. I am able to checking the pbxUser and perspectivev3 files, but not the project.pbxproj. Any suggestions? -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en.
Re: Merge
We're talking about svn-merge/branch/switch functionality, which is a very key part of SVN. Not diff/merge stuff :) Shan On Jan 10, 5:32 pm, Steve M smun...@gmail.com wrote: I agree that diff/merge was certainly an omission. It was almost a deal-breaker for me to buy Versions. Sofa has taken care of that now, but they did that by adding another product (Kaleidoscope). I don't want to have to buy another product to get a feature that should be built into this one. Anyway, I use TextWrangler for diff/merge and I'm quite happy with it. Anyone who is struggling with this feature should download and install TextWrangler. It integrates really nicely with Versions and it gets the job done. Apple's FileMerge is part of the Dev Tools (I believe?) so that works fine for Objective-C developers, but web developers running on a Mac may not decide to go that route. On Jan 5, 3:27 pm, Daniel Dickison danieldicki...@gmail.com wrote: I agree -- it was useful to see that Cornerstone had gotten a merge feature. Competition is good and I hope it pressures Sofa to up the ante. On the other hand, I tried the new Cornerstone and fortunately (for Sofa), I'll be sticking with Versions for now. We have repositories with hundreds of thousands of files and revisions, and Cornerstone's fancy timeline view doesn't seem to scale very well for large histories. Things like viewing the log message and diffs for a specific revision from 2 years ago is a lot easier to navigate with Versions. And to do that Versions was using 400MB RAM vs 1.5GB for Cornerstone. So, hopefully performance is one aspect Versions can stay on top while adding new features. Daniel On Jan 3, 3:42 pm, ct-scan jzg...@gmail.com wrote: I'm glad the link to Cornerstone was posted, I've been using Versions since the beta, and am getting frustrated that this obvious feature still isn't integrated. Maybe instead of additional UI enhancements (like the ones that just came out), adding this much requested feature would be better. I'd even upgrade to a new version for this feature, with no hesitation. I love Versions, but it's just not the most complete tool out there. I hope they fix this. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versi...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en.
Re: Congrats, Versions team
Yeah, that's what I meant. I just didn't want to say it again, I've asked for merging a couple times already on this list. Shan On Dec 2, 6:09 pm, Matthew Young m...@objectivea.com wrote: Isn't the #1 requested item branching and merging? -Matt On Dec 2, 2010, at 4:05 PM, David Dunham wrote: On 2 Dec 2010, at 15:50, versions+nore...@googlegroups.com wrote: Of course, if we could get the #1 requested feature added, that'd be great too. I won't mention it again, we all know what it is ;) I know, I've been waiting for the ability to search the log for the longest time. But yes, nice to see a fairly substantial update. David Dunham http://a-sharp.com Twitter: @ASharpLLC -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versi...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group athttp://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versi...@googlegroups.com. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en.
Re: Merging Branches Into Trunk
Koen, This is exactly the type of communication I was hoping for. I'm now looking forward to this upcoming version on an unpredictable timeline :) On Aug 8, 5:53 am, Koen Bok k...@madebysofa.com wrote: Hey Quinn, Shan and Ray, For what it's worth, I can officially confirm we're working on it. It's a tough one, but we feel we're on the right way to tackle it. Regarding the timeframe I can't promise anything. I can however give some hints on why this is taking some time. - Subversions 1.6 merging became a lot better, so we had to wait for that. It was actually pretty tough to do 1.51.6 but we have it now. - Subversions merging options are so complex that we need to make choices to keep the ui usable, involving lots of discussions and research. - Merging as a problem is more then subversion alone. You also have to deal with content/conflicts in a sensible way if you want to do it right. And Quinn, if your job gets less dreamy, shoot me an email ;-) - Koen On Aug 7, 7:08 pm, Shan iotas...@gmail.com wrote: Quinn, No offense taken. At first, I shared your opinion, but unfortunately given the utter silence from the Versions team, and lack of responses to any methods of communication other than this group, they really left me with no other options. I've waited patiently since the beta for any sort of hint that they'll be adding merge, yet week after week someone asks for merge to be a feature, with no feedback from the team. I don't feel that I'm more important than anyone else, but I'd rather let them know they're about to lose a customer now, rather than they just don't see me upgrade to 2.0 because I'm already gone. It's nice that you happen to know that 1.1 and 2.0 are being worked on, but all I can do IS imagine, because of the lack of communication from the Versions team. From what I've read on the group, they barely respond to sales requests, and almost never to support requests, until you come to this group and raise a ruckus. I'm not saying that the the feature needs to be done tomorrow, or even a timeline on when it might be done, I'm just asking that the team acknowledge a year's worth of complaints of users who need the functionality, and give us some hope that they're actually planning on doing something about it. Shan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
Re: Merging Branches Into Trunk
Quinn, No offense taken. At first, I shared your opinion, but unfortunately given the utter silence from the Versions team, and lack of responses to any methods of communication other than this group, they really left me with no other options. I've waited patiently since the beta for any sort of hint that they'll be adding merge, yet week after week someone asks for merge to be a feature, with no feedback from the team. I don't feel that I'm more important than anyone else, but I'd rather let them know they're about to lose a customer now, rather than they just don't see me upgrade to 2.0 because I'm already gone. It's nice that you happen to know that 1.1 and 2.0 are being worked on, but all I can do IS imagine, because of the lack of communication from the Versions team. From what I've read on the group, they barely respond to sales requests, and almost never to support requests, until you come to this group and raise a ruckus. I'm not saying that the the feature needs to be done tomorrow, or even a timeline on when it might be done, I'm just asking that the team acknowledge a year's worth of complaints of users who need the functionality, and give us some hope that they're actually planning on doing something about it. Shan --~--~-~--~~~---~--~~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups Versions group. To post to this group, send email to versions@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to versions+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/versions?hl=en -~--~~~~--~~--~--~---
