List Info

Thread: Update before Commit ?
Update before Commit ?
user name
 2007-10-24 08:34:29 

  


  

    Hi, 

if the same class is checked out by two users and they both modify it and one of them check it in before, the second one can't overwrite it. 

He must update it before he can commit. That is a good feature which forces to download all changes made to repos,  but even after merging all changes to  the local copy and having local changes extra, he still ned to do update to be able to have commit option activated.


This means , the second user loses all his changes he made to the local copy once he updates it.

Is there any solution for this problem ?

Thanks.






  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    Re:  Update before Commit ?
  


  

     user name

     2007-10-24 08:41:52
  


  

    
EL MIé, 24-10-2007 A LAS 09:34 -0400, KIRAN KARNATI
ESCRIBIó:
> HI, 
> 
> IF THE SAME CLASS IS CHECKED OUT BY TWO USERS AND THEY
BOTH MODIFY IT
> AND ONE OF THEM CHECK IT IN BEFORE, THE SECOND ONE
CAN'T OVERWRITE
> IT. 
> 
> HE MUST UPDATE IT BEFORE HE CAN COMMIT. THAT IS A GOOD
FEATURE WHICH
> FORCES TO DOWNLOAD ALL CHANGES MADE TO REPOS,  BUT EVEN
AFTER MERGING
> ALL CHANGES TO  THE LOCAL COPY AND HAVING LOCAL CHANGES
EXTRA, HE
> STILL NED TO DO UPDATE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE COMMIT OPTION
ACTIVATED. 

UPDATE DOES NOT IMPLY "UPDATE AND OVERRIDE." THE
FORMER DOES NOT
OVERWRITE THE LOCAL CHANGES, THE LATTER DOES. YOU MIGHT BE
MISSING THE
"MARK CONFLICTS SOLVED" STEP AFTER MERGE.

> THIS MEANS , THE SECOND USER LOSES ALL HIS CHANGES HE
MADE TO THE LOCAL COPY ONCE HE UPDATES IT.
> 
> IS THERE ANY SOLUTION FOR THIS PROBLEM ?

YOU SHOULDN'T BE HAVING THIS PROBLEM. THAT'S ONE OF THE MAIN
REASONS TO
USE A REVISION CONTROL SYSTEM WITH MERGE SUPPORT SUCH AS
SUBVERSION.
REVIEW YOUR PROCEDURE.

-- 
JAVIER KOHEN <JKOHENUSERS.SOURCEFORGE.NET>
ICQ: BLASHYRKH #2361802
JABBER: JKOHENJABBER.ORG



  


  

    
  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    Re:  Update before Commit ?
  


  

     user name

     2007-10-24 09:48:54
  


  

    

  


  

    Thank You Javier,

You are right, I think I forgot --> "Mark conflicts solved&quot; step after merge.

I did not try it now but I will try it and let you know.

have a good one.

/Kiran



On 10/24/07, Javier Kohen < jkohenusers.sourceforge.net">jkohenusers.sourceforge.net> wrote:


El mié, 24-10-2007 a las 09:34 -0400, Kiran Karnati escribió:
> Hi,
>
&gt; if the same class is checked out by two users and they both modify it
> and one of them check it in before, the second one can't overwrite


> it.
>
&gt; He must update it before he can commit. That is a good feature which
> forces to download all changes made to repos,&nbsp; but even after merging
&gt; all changes to &nbsp;the local copy and having local changes extra, he

> still ned to do update to be able to have commit option activated.

Update does not imply "update and override.&quot; The former does not
overwrite the local changes, the latter does. You might be missing the

&quot;Mark conflicts solved&quot; step after merge.

&gt; This means , the second user loses all his changes he made to the local copy once he updates it.
>
&gt; Is there any solution for this problem ?


You shouldn9;t be having this problem. That's one of the main reasons to
use a revision control system with merge support such as Subversion.
Review your procedure.

--
Javier Kohen < jkohenusers.sourceforge.net">
jkohenusers.sourceforge.net>
ICQ: blashyrkh #2361802
Jabber:  jkohenjabber.org">jkohenjabber.org






  

  
  
   
     
    






 [1-3]











   
 





about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )