On 17/04/2018 22:46, TortoiseSVN on behalf of Luke1410 wrote: > On 17/04/2018 22:04, Stefan via TortoiseSVN wrote: >> >> >> On Monday, April 16, 2018 at 12:21:00 PM UTC+2, Stefan_Ego wrote: >> >> >> The title states: "Edit Tree Conflicts". Is this just an issue >> with the title being misnamed or does this conflict trigger the >> "wrong" resolution dialog for me? >> >> >> Yep, the title is wrong - copy/paste error in code. Will fix that soon. >> >> As for the other buttons and texts on those: >> Those texts are provided by the svn library. You get the same texts >> and hints in the command line client. So we can not change those. > When we discussed the SVN API interface change it was argued that > clients can still filter out which options they provide and how they > present them. The same goes for the texts. The ones provided by the > API were argued to be seen as a fallback means and a complete list of > all possible options. I'm quite sure that the "accept base" option for > text conflicts was available to clients already with the 1.9 SVN API, > though this option was never presented to the user in the TSVN client > (and IMO that was done for good reasons). The options to take the > complete incoming/local file version I think are new and I argued for > providing these, since I thought in light of TSVN these would be quite > useful especially given that the old "use local/incoming where > conflicting" options were of very limited use in TSVN due to the lack > of a presentation where the content actually conflicted. > That said: Nothing should prevent TSVN from deciding itself which > options to present to the user and what exact phrasing/descriptions to > use. The provided texts should merely be seen as a default/fallback > option (especially if there are user provided/new resolution options > available, which TSVN doesn't know about just yet). > > I'll make a note regarding the description for the edit command. If > that's the one provided by the SVN API atm, it certainly doesn't seem > accurate. For the other descriptions/names I find it hard to argue > against the default names, since different client have different > requirements and these are technically the right terms/nomenclature to > use from SVN point's of view I fear... Unfortunately it's impossible > to provide options/descriptions form a SVN design point of view which > would be suitable for all clients/purposes, IMO. > > Regards, > Stefan > stsp pointed out that the edit description is not part of the list of commands provided by the SVN API. Looking at the current TSVN source it's defined in TortoiseProcEng.rc: IDS_EDITCONFLICT_PROP_EDITCMD
Apparently that one is also used in TextConflictEditorDlg.cpp line 188 for editing text conflicts. I take it a new/separate resource for that description should be added and used there instead of reusing the PROP_EDITCMD one, no? Regards, Stefan -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TortoiseSVN" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tortoisesvn/0d91db83-83f4-5402-fe40-121d15a5debc%40gmx.de. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
