Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

If you are having a problem using Vault, post a message here.

Moderator: SourceGear

GregM
Posts: 485
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 9:00 am

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by GregM » Sat Mar 19, 2011 9:30 pm

While you're working on Merge Branches, can we have user filtering and non-contiguous selections too?

jclausius
Posts: 3603
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: SourceGear
Contact:

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by jclausius » Mon Mar 21, 2011 7:52 am

Greg,

In regards to filtering, besides what has already what has been discussed in this post and in others (with Lynn), what are your other ideas?
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear

GregM
Posts: 485
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 9:00 am

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by GregM » Mon Mar 21, 2011 11:38 am

Sorry if that wasn't clear, "user filtering" == "filtering by username".

I generally only want to merge my own changes, so an option to include only my changes, changes from all users, or changes from selected users like in the history filtering.

robe070
Posts: 176
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2008 7:42 pm

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by robe070 » Mon Mar 21, 2011 3:16 pm

jclausius wrote:Rob,

One of the biggest problem with Vault's presentation in this regard is deciding what was last merged for subsequent merges. We'll look to see if we can improve this when it comes implementing improvements in Merge Branches for Vault 6.
Thats exactly it. First merge is fine. Each succesive merge gets more and more littered with previous changes.
regards

Rob Goodridge
LANSA Pty Ltd
Software Made Simple
Vault 5.0.3

jclausius
Posts: 3603
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: SourceGear
Contact:

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by jclausius » Tue Mar 22, 2011 7:43 am

GregM wrote:Sorry if that wasn't clear, "user filtering" == "filtering by username".

I generally only want to merge my own changes, so an option to include only my changes, changes from all users, or changes from selected users like in the history filtering.
Understood.

and
robe070 wrote:Thats exactly it. First merge is fine. Each succesive merge gets more and more littered with previous changes.
Understood.
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear

joshyeager
Posts: 60
Joined: Wed Aug 18, 2004 11:15 am

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by joshyeager » Mon Mar 28, 2011 8:17 am

I'm not as concerned about Vault 6 as Rob is, but I do want to reinforce his request for better merge support. We make a branch for each major version that we release to customers, so that we can patch them if necessary. This works fine in most cases, because we can just merge those patches back into the trunk. But, we occasionally encounter a situation where a customer needs a patch to fix a bug that we have already fixed in the trunk. In that case, our options are to merge a few changes from the trunk into the branch, or to re-implement the fix in the branch. Either way, the next time we try to merge the branch into the trunk, it becomes quite difficult to exclude the changes that were made for that particular fix. We can't include them, because the fix in the branch is usually slightly different from the fix in the trunk, either because of other changes in the code or because the branch has a stripped-down version of the fix.

We have also had a few situations where we had to make a temporary feature branch because a customer needed us to implement a new feature ahead of our normal release cycle. In those cases, we would make a branch from the version the customer was running, and implement the new feature in that branch. Once it was done, we needed to merge the new feature into the trunk, which was very difficult because the branch was made from another branch instead of directly from the trunk. Since Vault didn't realize that fact, it would try to merge a lot of code that should not be merged.

Eric Sink wrote an article in 2009 which describes the behavior that I would hope to see in these cases. http://www.ericsink.com/entries/merge_history.html. When I saw it, I was hoping that meant that Vault would be getting that feature soon.

GregM
Posts: 485
Joined: Sat Mar 13, 2004 9:00 am

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by GregM » Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:36 am

GregM wrote:While you're working on Merge Branches, can we have user filtering and non-contiguous selections too?
I see these didn't make it into Vault 6. Any timeline for adding these features?

I'd also really like to be able to disable the search for modified files in the merge destination folder. It seems to be taking longer and longer these days. At least subsequent merges into the same destination folder seem to be faster on this step.

jclausius
Posts: 3603
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2003 1:17 pm
Location: SourceGear
Contact:

Re: Very disappointed with Vault Standard 6.0 feature list

Post by jclausius » Thu Oct 18, 2012 10:55 am

Unfortunately, non-contiguous ranges proved to be a more difficult challenge and didn't make it into Vault 6. It is a feature currently scheduled for the next major release of Vault, "Vault 7."

I'll also add a feature request regarding to re-visit the scan for modified files. Don't know if we'll find anything, but at least we'll give it a once-over to see if there are any glaring performance issues.
Jeff Clausius
SourceGear

Post Reply