[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo
From: |
Thomas Zander |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo) |
Date: |
Wed, 24 Dec 2003 02:48:33 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.5.94 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Tuesday 23 December 2003 20:39, Tom Lord wrote:
> there's a strong suggestion here that the output of the
> (batch) merge tool is not a document of the same type as the inputs --
> but is instead a document of the type understood by this widget. In
> other words:
>
> [OO doc]
> |
> (merge stuff in)
> |
> V
> [merge report]
> |
> (use the merge widget)
> |
> V
> [OO doc]
>
> That indirection seems undesirable to me. I'd rather see some effort
> at avoiding it.
If so; you missed the whole point of this setup.
If you have two documents you can make a diff; when you want to do merging
with a diff and a thirth document you would show the changes (result of
diff) to the user to allow him more control over the merging process.
In the case of a diff(1) this is simple lines; pretty darn simple to show
to the user.
In the case of an open office document things become a lot harder; since
its a DOM tree with lots of interpretation that diff tool can not do.
What I proposed (please reference my email from 10:57:39 yesterday morning)
is to read the output of the diff (not the merge, just the diff) and merge
it in the OOo widget.
> You're just dancing around the problem and handwaving about your
> favorite technologies -- not actually solving it.
The fact that you don't follow me and that all those nice technologies are
new and scary is not something you can blame me for (or W3C for that
matter).
I was actually afraid you were gonna laugh at the annoying detail I put in
the mail you replied to; instead I did not go deep enough.
I hope you will forgive me if I don't try to explain it all; at least not
without a black-bord and us being in the same room.
- --
Thomas Zander
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/6PBxCojCW6H2z/QRAkN8AKD3+3lf44NGbTAUTwb2MJ5r4ttKNQCeJwCL
e5nohU6aPiov5jyWJySzSzs=
=72vp
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, (continued)
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Mark A. Flacy, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Tom Lord, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Thomas Zander, 2003/12/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Tom Lord, 2003/12/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Thomas Zander, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Tom Lord, 2003/12/22
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Thomas Zander, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Charles Duffy, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Tom Lord, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo), Thomas Zander, 2003/12/23
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: revision control for documents (was plug-in foo),
Thomas Zander <=
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Aaron Bentley, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Aaron Bentley, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/22
- Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Momchil Velikov, 2003/12/23
- [Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, michael josenhans, 2003/12/21
Re: [Gnu-arch-users] File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, Andrew Suffield, 2003/12/19
[Gnu-arch-users] Re: File-tpye plug-in architecture for Arch?, michael josenhans, 2003/12/21