On 11 March 2010 05:29, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
> On 3/10/2010 6:54 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote:
>>
>> Andreas, i think that checking the repo before commit is brittle thing:
>> a) You not always comitting into same repository.
>> b) A remote repository is not always accessible, and so, one may
>> simply save a file into local filesystem, and then manually copy it to
>> the server.
>> c) a most insulting thing is, that when you clicking 'save', it trying
>> to connect to the net _before_ saving a file on local repository, and
>> throwing an exception into your face instead of doing a simplest
>> possible thing - just save it.
>
> We simply have different working styles. None of the above applies to my
> workflows. For example, I *do* commit into the same repostories practically
> always (if I don't then it's because I'm doing an explicit merge and single
> false positive really doesn't matter) and my remote repositories *are*
> always accessible (if they aren't I call up our admin and give him an
> earful) and since MC is going to commit it to the repository anyway, having
> it contact it sooner rather than later makes absolutely no difference to me.
>

You know, i had problems several times because i was assuming, that i
always can access to remote repository
and commit things right away.
And then i lost the packages, lost the commit history because of that.

> I'm not saying you have to use this style, I'm saying it works for me and is
> much more efficient than the alternatives. In particular checking a
> repository after each commit is something that I just can't be bothered
> with. Doing this kind of mechanical stuff is exactly what tools are for.
>

Its ok to check _after_ you successfully commit. But not before. See my point?

> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.