your needs. OS X simply does
not give you that freedom.
Cue
On Mar 22, 4:20 pm, objectx michaelpled...@hotmail.com wrote:
I'm guessing this is a common problem for people running svn on os X
due to the lack of folder merging in the finder... what's the best way
to avoid the
'users/filepath
I assume your not referring to the svn cleanup utility?
If not, you'd have to manually remove the SVN files since clients serve the
purpose of managing versioned files.
Quick terminal command would be:
cd /path/to/directory
find . -type d -name .svn -exec rm -fR {} \;
Hope this helps.
Cue
query.
Cue
On 15 Feb 2011, at 13:03, Rhiannon rhiannon.mil...@prepress-projects.co.uk
wrote:
Hi
I've been trying out the demo of Versions for the last few days, with
a view to using it in our publishing company. None of us, including
me, have ever used any version control system before (we
It's a shame really. If it had merge it would be the best looking and working
without a shadow of a doubt.
Why do great looking apps always lack key functionality!
Cue
On 11 Jan 2011, at 20:04, Charles Fahey cfa...@cfahey.com wrote:
Hi Steve,
Just to clarify, Kaleidoscope does not merge
Is there a way to exclude files from a commit? In other words an inverse method
of what Peter described?
Cue
On 10 Jan 2011, at 11:18, Jorde Vorstenbosch jordevorstenbo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Peter,
Just select the files you want to commit in the browse tab, then hit commit.
Jorde
changes and forget
they exist.
Checkboxes in the commit dialog serves a vast purpose for occasions such as
this.
Cue
--
Web: www.qbizzle.com
Twitter: @cuebizzle
Mobile: 07809 874722
On 10 Jan 2011, at 12:48, Jorde Vorstenbosch jordevorstenbo...@gmail.com
wrote:
Cue,
Permanently
Indeed it does come with dev tools and text wrangler works just as well with
Versions as does Apples native FileMerge. The ingenius part of text wrangler is
the ability to have the freedom to choose what gets merged where so on so
forth. Kaleidoscope however is more or less a difference tool.
I agree to some extent. For those that don't necessarily require merge are
happy with a fancy interface that works well for what it does. What bugs me is
that sometimes it feels like Versions is too comfortable and doesn't see any
competition. The truth in the matter is that when you invest in
I agree. Cornerstone's merge methodology works well in at least the basic way.
I haven't yet had the unfortunate experience of having to merge heavy conflicts
so I cannot speculate to that extent. But it does the job, and if Versions
incorporated such a feature I may just hang on to it
Cue
It's easy to say your going to make a change than make it happen. I hope this
is not another one of those failing New Years Resolution that's ends up on a
back bench...
On 18 Oct 2010, at 07:42, TheDO thedigitalorch...@me.com wrote:
Was Pico's involvement the cause of the long delays
.
If Versions attempts to access a working copy while it's locked, that status
is displayed in the browsing view table.
- Quinn
On Sep 13, 2010, at 11:46 AM, Cue wrote:
I would shut down versions just incase. I'm not entirely sure what it does
when it initiates on start up but better
How strange is this, think of any word and I can create a folder with
that name in my repository.
However, I try creating a folder (in the root of my repository) with
the name foundandco and Versions won't let me. Can someone else try
this and confirm?
--
You received this message because you
, Gabe Johnson johns...@cmu.edu wrote:
No problems with that dir name for me.
On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 5:47 AM, Cue qbiz...@googlemail.com wrote:
How strange is this, think of any word and I can create a folder with
that name in my repository.
However, I try creating a folder (in the root
Currently, I have to add any unversioned files before I commit,
because if I commit without adding the unversioned files are not
omitted to the list for the commit...
Is there a setting somewhere to make this work as it should? Or is
this a silly oversight? Or am I blind and dumb and not doing
Now I see what's going on. Google's WYSIWYG editor uses Markdown ehhh?
Sorry for the multiple irrelevant messages.
--
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
On Apr 28, 5:50 pm, Ray raimondi...@gmail.com wrote:
I've never seen this happen. What you describe is pretty basic use of SVN,
so I suspect something else is at play here. Versions successfully updates
my working copies.
When you did this, did you check what was going on with svn from the
View your previous revisions and find it. you can view it there.
--
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
if there are ignored files and such.
Does this make it any clearer? Sorry if Im being heavily detailed but
it's extremely frustrating.
On 5 May 2010, at 20:00, TheDO webmas...@thedigitalorchard.ca wrote:
On May 5, 1:44 am, Cue qbiz...@googlemail.com wrote:
On Apr 28, 5:50 pm, Ray raimondi...@gmail.com
Versions isn't all that great. After resolving a conflict, committing,
the file still has the exclamation icon overlay which marks it as
modified... What is going on?
SynchroSVN is an ugly app, but it works as its supposed to.
Unfortunately I've now had to revert back to that. Thankfully I was
I have a working copy checkout on MAC1 and MAC2.
MAC1 deletes a file, commits.
MAC2 updates, the file is deleted from the disk (it doesn't exist! how
it should be!)... but in Versions it STILL appears as an unversioned
file.
The pros: The file doesn't actually exist when committing or nothing
20 matches
Mail list logo
