Settings and activity
87 results found
-
11 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment 
SWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
2 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
Hi!
I just build the basic plugin myself ;)
https://github.com/KhaosCoders/sonar_scm_plasticscm
Feel free to advertice itSWSBB
shared this idea
·
-
14 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesSWSBB
shared this idea
·
-
24 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
44 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
48 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
59 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
1 voteSWSBB
shared this idea
·
-
9 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
Sorry to keep you waiting.
I'm not very familiar with git, so maybe you are right with that squash thingie.The substractive merge is fine. But it will undo all changes of one changeset.
If there are to files in the changeset and I only need to undo one, then both will be undone and I have to redo the change I didn't wanted to undo. That is how it works today.We can totaly work with that! But I thought it would be nice to have the split option as well.
This wouldn't only benefit the "partial-undo" but also the "partial cherry-pick".I'll also accept "no" as an answer ;) It was just a thought.
An error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
Here are two images explaining the graphs
https://ibb.co/cxwq15
https://ibb.co/ejB18kAn error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
Please let me get this clear for you.
Imagine you checked in File1 and File2 in changeset A.
Then the smallest unit is changeset A (containing File1 and File2).When time passes, other changesets will be created (let’s call them by inheritance AA, AB, AAA)
As graph
A - AA - AAA
- AB
This is what plastic can do today.
If you wanted to revert the change in File2 you’d have a problem.Now here is what I think of:
Split up changeset A into A1 and A2. As a unit they’re “the same” as the old changeset A, but now you can merge them separately.
This is what it looks like:
(A1 - A2) - AA - AAA
- AB
That’s the theory. I’m not aware of your designs and maybe you’re right and it’s not possible.
But in my mind, it should be ;)Changeset A is the same as A1+A2, so there should be no problem.
You would have to change all references from changeset A to A2 of course.
And maybe you would have to do some reorganization of other data. But still, possible.Anyway, please share this with your team. It would be fantastic to see this feature in the future =)
We <3 Plastic SCM
SWSBB
shared this idea
·
-
9 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
102 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
We use an attribute "locked" in combination with a before-checkin trigger. This way we can lock branches. But it's easy to unlock them if needed.
An error occurred while saving the comment SWSBB
commented
In addition to that:
You should have the posibillity to "finialize"/lock a branch, too. So nobody can add changesets to this branch nomore.
Use case:
We develope new features in their own branches, just as normal. As soon as these features are released they are merged back into Trunk (main branch) and from there on all changes on this modul/feature/whatever should be made in speparate branches. Therefor the 'old' feature branch need a lock or finalized mark, which prevents unsers from making changes.SWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
25 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
3 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
4 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
10 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
6 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
-
40 votesSWSBB
supported this idea
·
While semantic history is great and shows the right amount of information, it still is a bit hidden from the user. I realized it just today that this is actually a thing! I'm using plastic since version 3... -.-
I think something similar to CodeLens could improve that. Adding an annotation for each method is no big deal for an extension. You should do that!