SourceGear Support

Hi Lane (and others),

My name is Eric Sink. The title on my business card says "The Top Level of the Company".

Please know that we take this situation very seriously. When this kind of bug slips through our QA process, we are embarrassed and upset. We figure out what happened. We talk about how to ...

No disagreement here. In fact, you're asking for some things we are already working on, such as Camtasia videos highlighting specific features.

Do note, however, that some of the stuff you want may show up on the SourceGear website instead of on my blog. And some of the stuff on my blog that you'd ...

We've been re-evaluating this issue as we receive feedback from more customers. Thanks for the update.

It is really important for us that you communicate a target date/release for properly implementing this feature.

I'm sorry that you are disappointed with the decisions we have made about this issue. We always prefer to implement the features requested by our users. In this case, things are a bit ...

I hope I can be really frank here

Always. :)

- What are the odds you guys are in business a year from now (sorry, brutal honesty)
- Have you had a big decline in sales during the TFS hype/beta/release process?

We will definitely be in business a year from now. Believe it or not, we've ...

This is usually done with branches. Suppose you start with 'dev' as the main tree in which development happens. Make 'test' a branch of 'dev'. Make 'prod' a branch of 'test'. When you want to promote code, merge the changes from dev to test or from test to prod.

Disclaimer: I'm writing this sort of ...

The main problem I see here is that .m3 files are not configured to be "mergable".

Vault decides whether a file is considered mergable by its suffix. We have preconfigured most of the common file suffixes for source code, but I'm pretty m3 is not one of the ones in the built-in list. It's Modula 3 ...

This is item 10098 in our bug database. I'm not making any promises, but I have marked the item to remind us to give the matter some attention for the next release, which is Vault 3.5, which is scheduled to happen sometime in the next few months.

Thanks for the reminder.

Recognition of keyword expansion, so that it doesn't create an unnecessary conflict (this easily causes the majority of my conflicts during a merge, each of which I must manually resolve).



+1 for the keyword expansion ignore. We don't use merge very often (we branch for releases only), but ...

I have no idea why it failed
Eric,
In many ways that was my point. Merge branches should really be giving more information, so that I know what's going on as it sits there, and so that when it fails I have some hope of knowing why.

I looked at the server log file, but it's set to quiet logging ...

GregM wrote:Is this going to completely replace the existing merging?

Yes. Maintaining both is not an attractive idea, and unfortunately the current design is optimized for an uncommon case.

Vault 4 only allows merge between folders where one folder is a branch of the other. This helps, because the correspondence between files is easy to figure out when we know that there was a point in the past when they were identical.

However, it makes bidirectional merge harder.

So Vault 4 ...

I'm heading home now, and I'm hoping to see some advice in response when I get in tomorrow morning.

I would very much like to give you the magic advice to quickly get you past your problem, however the key sentence in your note is this one:

I have no idea why it failed

To move forward, we ...

Well, I'm stuck. I can't find the problem. When you single-step the code, at which line does the problem appear? Please provide as much detail as you can.

Thanks.

I'm trying to read this code and figure out what's wrong, but I'm allergic to VB, so I keep having to stop and sneeze. :)

So you're saying that you get a file to the local disk, and that file's contents seem to be corrupted?

I'll keep reading this code, but I figured I might as well as for any ...