I've been trying to follow this suggestion but I got a little confused because I don't normally follow the workflow that was being described. I was curious and thought I'd try to create a simple test to better understand.
I created a test repo. I added a couple of text files with some content. I then created two separate checkouts. On one of the checkouts, I made a couple of further commits to change one of the files. After that, I updated the second checkout. The update dialog titled "Update Finished!" showed changes to the one file that had been changed. In that update dialog, if I right click the changed file and choose the "Compare with working copy" context menu item, it opens a diff showing the changes that have been applied by the update. That is, the changes for the two additional commits made in the other checkout. I was a little surprised that this functionality existed since, at this point, there are no changes between the local working copy and the local pristine copy - both having been updated to the latest repo revision. I would also agree that the term "Compare with working copy" seems inaccurate and might be better as "Review update changes". In the update dialog, if I right click the changed file and choose the "Open" context menu item, it opens the file in an editor. Absolutely as expected. In the same dialog, if I double click that file it opens the file in an editor. That is, a double click performs the open operation. This does seem to be a surprising default action having already noted that the diff functionality is available. I also note that the update dialog has a "Show Log..." button. If I click that it shows a log of the changes that have been committed since the last checkout/update. This is particularly helpful for reviewing the changes commited by others as it doesn't simply show all the changes at once but allows each commit to be reviewed individually, including the helpful information in the commit message. The log view also allows all revisions to be selected allowing the cumulative effect of the changes on a particular file. Also note, that double clicking the file in the log view will show the diff view. If I were to make my own suggestion it would be that the update finished dialog report not only the final revision but the initial revision (e.g. "Updated from revision 900 to revision 1000"). If the update did something that I didn't want, this information allows for the option to return to the previous state by manually updating to the previous revision. In summary, it does seem that the default action (i.e. double click) for the file be to show the diff, rather than simply to open the file. However, if I were trying to review the changes committed by others that are applied by the update, another option is to review the changes from the log view using the button functionality that is already provided. This log view also has the benefit that it has the requested double click behaviour for individual files. Hope this help. On Tuesday, 23 March 2021 at 04:22:38 UTC Tony Rietwyk wrote: > I agree with David, it IS confusing terminology. My reading of the code > is that "Compare with working copy" calls CompareWithWC, which does an > extract, then calls the diff utility. I don't recall the compare ever > having to wait for the server, so I'm confused by Stefan's response. > Hopefully my request is now clearer to him, and we can get an option to > enable this behaviour override. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TortoiseSVN" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tortoisesvn/80287904-fc84-4312-baf1-a0dd3e6bc1d9n%40googlegroups.com.
