Community
Participate
Working Groups
3.0 RC3 When committing changes to the server it makes sense to prompt the user about un-saved editors, and not only the editors for the files being committed. I missed a file because it was in an un-saved editor. We should investigate extending TeamOperations to support prompt for all dirty in addition to only for a specified file selection.
*** Bug 106867 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
I'd like to suggest to show these unsaved editors as outgoing changes in Syncronize view and if user choose to commit any of them Eclipse should suggest to save modified files and then do actual commit.
Although that sounds interesting, I think that the effort to implement it would far exceed the benefit. I think a much more cost-effective (and platform consistent) approach would be to prompt for any open editors when committing and not just those in the current selection.
(In reply to comment #3) > Although that sounds interesting, I think that the effort to implement it > would far exceed the benefit. I think a much more cost-effective (and platform > consistent) approach would be to prompt for any open editors when committing > and not just those in the current selection. Please at least show list of dirty dirty editors in that prompt dialog (with check boxes) and by default preselect editors that overlap with current synchronization set? Buttons select all, unselect all would be also nice, but it is probably already part of some standard dialog.
Yes, this is the platform consistent means I was referring to. The plan is to show this dialog if there are any open editors during a commit.
(In reply to comment #5) > Yes, this is the platform consistent means I was referring to. The plan is to > show this dialog if there are any open editors during a commit. So, will it show list of all unsaved editors but select only those that match current commit/update scope?
It would have to show them all since the scope may have been determined by what was in the sync view and that would miss any open editors on files that have never been modified on disk but are modified in an editor.
(In reply to comment #7) > It would have to show them all since the scope may have been determined by > what was in the sync view and that would miss any open editors on files that > have never been modified on disk but are modified in an editor. Heh. It sooo makes sense to show dirty editors in synchronize view. :-(
The model-based sync view prompts for any open editors in the same project when committing. I haven;t changed the Team>Commit behavior and we won't have time to do so in 3.2.
We do not plan on adressing this issue in 3.3.
This bug hasn't had any activity in quite some time. Maybe the problem got resolved, was a duplicate of something else, or became less pressing for some reason - or maybe it's still relevant but just hasn't been looked at yet. If you have further information on the current state of the bug, please add it. The information can be, for example, that the problem still occurs, that you still want the feature, that more information is needed, or that the bug is (for whatever reason) no longer relevant.
