My experiment shows the Javadoc isn't really accurate in practice with EGit.
Also, with the proposal:
* "Derived resources are not original data, and can be recreated from other resources." is true as the duplicate in nested project can be perceived as the original data
* "a team provider should assume that the resource is not under version and configuration management by default. That is, the resource should only be stored in a team repository if the user explicitly indicates that this resource is worth saving." it's the case if user explicitly says the resource is worth saving in the parent project (moreover, EGit ignores that apparently as it prefers the .gitignore)
I do not fully see the Javadoc as being against that change, and my experiment seems to confirm that the proposal of marking nested project folders as derived seems to fit int the main invariants enforced by the javadoc.
_______________________________________________ platform-dev mailing list platform-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx To change your delivery options, retrieve your password, or unsubscribe from this list, visit
