Bug 75832 - [Repo View] Improve handling of non-root-level projects
Summary: [Repo View] Improve handling of non-root-level projects
Status: ASSIGNED
Alias: None
Product: Platform
Classification: Eclipse Project
Component: CVS (show other bugs)
Version: 3.1   Edit
Hardware: PC Windows XP
: P5 enhancement (vote)
Target Milestone: ---   Edit
Assignee: platform-cvs-inbox CLA
QA Contact:
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords: helpwanted
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2004-10-07 14:44 EDT by Mike Schrag CLA
Modified: 2019-09-06 15:31 EDT (History)
3 users (show)

See Also:


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Mike Schrag CLA 2004-10-07 14:44:38 EDT
From Michael Valenta:

"Non-root projects are a whole other problem. The repo view currently only
caches tags for root level projects so non-root projects only get the tags from
there. That explains why you are encountering so many problems. I thought we has
a bug report for this already but I couldn't find one. Feel free to enter one
about the poor handling of non-root projects or add a comment to the bug you
just entered ( Bug 75828 ) since I suspect improvements in the handling of
non-root projects would go a long way in helping in your situation. "
Comment 1 Michael Valenta CLA 2004-10-18 14:15:56 EDT
This would actually be a fair amount of work and is not on the 3.1 plan.
Comment 2 Michael Valenta CLA 2006-06-15 15:04:46 EDT
There is currently no plan to address this item.
Comment 3 JR CLA 2006-09-18 09:41:48 EDT
My comment is about how the CVS repositories view displays versions with a
project hierarchy on the CVS side:

1) I create two Java projects called Project1 and Project2.
2) I share Project1 as module name Java/Project1 on a CVS and
Project2 as Java/Project2 in the same repository.
3) I tag two versions of Project1 (rc1 and rc2) and 
one version for Project2 (rc1).


1) Why do I have to refresh branches (deep search) to get tags for non-root
projects?
2) More importantly, why do I have the following hierarchy in the versions
tree:

Versions
   Java
      Java rc1
         Project1
         Project2
      Java rc2
         Project1 
         Project2 (empty)

instead of

Versions
      Java
         Project1
            Project1 rc1
            Project1 rc2
         Project2
            Project2 rc1
Comment 4 Michael Valenta CLA 2006-09-18 09:51:38 EDT
The repositories view was written at a time when Eclipse only supported top level projects. The restriction in Eclipse has been removed but we have never revisited the Repositories view implementation and do not intend to do so as the main CVsS workflows in Eclipse (e.g. Checkout, Synchronize) do not require that view. Contributiosn are wlecome.
Comment 5 Szymon Brandys CLA 2007-11-21 06:48:29 EST
LATER is deprecated. Changing to NEW P5 helpwanted.
Comment 6 Krzysztof Daniel CLA 2007-11-21 07:32:43 EST
When user checkouts non-root project from CVS, and tags it, parent folder is not tagged. What more, parent folder cannot be tagged because CVS does not support directory versioning. 

Repository view display (in basic configuration) .project tags as project tags. Root folder containing non-root projects does not have such a file. One thing we can do in this area is to perform a deep search. Or configure branches or versions to use particular files. But both those solutions will damage the performance if there will be a complicated directory/project structure.

I actually see two solutions here:
1. Refresh branches should have semi deep search with configurable folder depth and (optional) configurable file names. This is a compromise between performance and functionality.
2. We wait until bug 35973 gets resolved - I have hope we will be able to use on of those variants:
a. tag root project when tagging children (we should have .project then or any other file)
b. get from root project child projects and refresh every project independently and aggregate them.

What do you think guys?
 

Comment 7 Eclipse Webmaster CLA 2019-09-06 15:31:30 EDT
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.