Thanks for the information. I tried with the synchronize-view-style commit dialog and can confirm that the model is not called when the commit dialog is opened.
I will also have a look at the Subversive code. Let me know when you have more information.
From: subversive-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [subversive-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] on behalf of Alexander Gurov [alexander.gurov@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Wednesday, July 04, 2012 8:35
To: Developers mailing list
Subject: Re: [subversive-dev] Status of Logical Model Integration support
First of all - there are two modes for these dialogs:
2) "Synchronize view"-based
They're being controled by the option "Window->Preferences->Team->SVN->Show selected resources in resouce changes pane".
If there was model support - it could only be implemented for the second mode, since the first one does not provide required visual facilities.
And now the second point: I checked the code - it seems like the resource selection panel's code is founded on the same base as the Synchronize View support, but it still does not show models. There are two reasons possible: something is not finished or the
models are disabled for some reason.
Regarding estimate - unfortunately I can't give it yet: since the code was made when I wasn't working on the project, I should spend a little more time to understand how it actually works and why it does not work as expected.
29.06.2012 16:06, Biörnstad, Biörn пишет:
In the mean-time, we have started implementing a prototype for the Model side of the Logical Model Integration framework. The synchronization view now shows our model.
However, the dialogs shown by Subversive actions like commit, revert or lock do not show any model objects. From the logging output of my classes, it seems that Subversive is not trying to show our model. For example, I would expect my ModelProvider to be consulted
when trying to commit some resources.
So, my question is: do the mentioned dialogs attempt to show model content? If yes, can you give me any hints on what I could be doing wrong? If no, can you estimate the effort of adding the corresponding functionality to Subversive?
There is a list of an partially unimplemented or implemented not in the best possible way features:
- Provide access to remote configurations using the Eclipse File System API in the
org.eclipse.core.filesystem plug-in and link this to workspace projects through the ProjectSetCapability
(not all methods were implemented)
- IChangeGroupingRequestor (probably is implemented not in the best way)
At first glance it is all I could find. Is there something else that prevents you from using Subversive as part of your product?
01.06.2011 14:54, Biörnstad, Biörn пишет:
subversive-dev mailing list
I would like to ask you what the status of Subversive's support for Logical Model Integration (LMI) is, in particular which of the steps in  have been completed for Subversive.
The only information I could find on the topic was the Subversive New and Noteworthy for Galileo , which states that you have put much effort into supporting LMI. The corresponding bug even states that "... almost all Team API is implemented". However,
prototypes on our side did not manage to uncover the complete support of LMI.
In our project, we want to integrate Subversive in our Eclipse product. A special requirement is that end-users will work exclusively with model objects and never see the corresponding workspace resources. Therefore, we would rely on a relatively complete
support of LMI on the part of the Team provider. We are considering implementing missing Subversive features if necessary and contributing these back to the project.
subversive-dev mailing list