This Bugzilla instance is a read-only archive of historic NetBeans bug reports. To report a bug in NetBeans please follow the project's instructions for reporting issues.
Summary: | Suggest offline mode for CVS | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | versioncontrol | Reporter: | Jesse Glick <jglick> |
Component: | CVS | Assignee: | issues@obsolete <issues> |
Status: | REOPENED --- | ||
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | P4 | ||
Version: | 3.x | ||
Hardware: | PC | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Issue Type: | ENHANCEMENT | Exception Reporter: |
Description
Jesse Glick
2000-08-02 18:56:10 UTC
For off-line mode you can turn off the FS property "Run CVS command to refresh the status of files". After that no automatic refresh will be done. However it is still possible to run CVS commands from the pop-up menu, which will fail when connecting to the server. It would be possible to do some check of Entries, but this may not give proper status info. When the file is modified in the Editor, it automatically gets status "Locally Modified". In the current implementation the module has much common with the generic VCS and therefore some special behavior will not be easy to implement. This intelligent behavior can be perhaps more easily added to javacvs module. I thing that in most cases running cvs commands off-line has no sense, even cvs add has to contact the server if someone else didn't add the file to the repository. Clearly exact status info cannot be gotten offline. But you can usually make a good guess--Emacs does (tells you if the file is *probably* modified) and it is very useful. Re. cvs add offline: even if someone else did add the same file to the repository, won't this just mean a conflict when you update anyway, just as for any other change? I.e. how is adding a file different from modifying one? Well, I leave this as a suggestion to try to find out the most accurate status of a file when working offline. Automaticaly changed Version from "Other" to "Dev" Version "Other" is nonsence Reopenning... *** Issue 12972 has been marked as a duplicate of this issue. *** |