Matching Diff in Left and Right Pane

[Michael Bulgrien]

October 12th, 2007 at 7:55 am (http://www.scootersoftware.com/cirrus/discussion/?p=31#comment-1604)
Since the fundamental purpase of a 3-way merge is to rectify differences between two versions of the same file that both derive from a common ancestor, it could be argued that there is no difference when the left and right side match (the two files being merged are in agreement) even though there is a common difference between those two files and the common ancestor. I’ve suggested functionality that would make merge sessions more flexible by providing the user with the ability to ignore difference sections when the left-hand side and the right-hand side are the same.


I've never had a response from the Scooter team on this one. Please add a Miscellaneous option to a Text Merge session as follows:

[ ] Matching differences in left and right pane are always unimportant

[Tim]

We'll add this to our wish list.

[withoutclass]

Originally Posted by Michael Bulgrien
October 12th, 2007 at 7:55 am
Since the fundamental purpase of a 3-way merge is to rectify differences between two versions of the same file that both derive from a common ancestor, it could be argued that there is no difference when the left and right side match (the two files being merged are in agreement) even though there is a common difference between those two files and the common ancestor. I’ve suggested functionality that would make merge sessions more flexible by providing the user with the ability to ignore difference sections when the left-hand side and the right-hand side are the same.


I've never had a response from the Scooter team on this one. Please add a Miscellaneous option to a Text Merge session as follows:

[ ] Matching differences in left and right pane are always unimportant

I don't see any feature like this still in the software. I'm finding that most of the time I don't care about the ancestor at all, but I prefer the 3-way merge window. An option to simply ignore the ancestor would be fantastic and save me lots of time at work each day.

[Chris]

You can use a "Text Merge" to just merge 2 files. If you don't load an ancestor file, BC will hide the center pane.

If you have an ancestor file already loaded in the Text Merge, just select the path edit for the center pane, delete the path text and hit enter. BC will then hide the center/ancestor pane.

[withoutclass]

Deleting the path works when it comes to the compare, but after I close the file Visual Studio says the merge was canceled as an unfortunate side effect.

edit2: switched to the 2 way merge and this is working well. Thank you.

[BamaBob]

Please explain how to do the 2-way-merge you mentioned:

"edit2: switched to the 2 way merge and this is working well."

I can't find anything in the help about a 2-way-merge, and when I delete the path for the center pane like Chris suggested, I also get the Visual Studio message about the merge being cancelled.

[Chris]

Hi BamaBob,

Follow the instructions for "2-way merge" under the Microsoft Team Foundation Server heading on our version control page: http://www.scootersoftware.com/support.php?zz=kb_vcs

In the two way merge, the merge will open in the text compare. If you save the left or right pane it will be used as the output for the merge.

[BamaBob]

Chris,

I think the "2-way merge" workaround is not as flexible and nice as being in "3-way merge" mode with the ability to treat matching differences in the left and right panes as unimportant.

I strongly vote for implementing Michael Bulgrein's original request for a setting like this:

[ ] Matching differences in left and right pane are always unimportant

Since Michael's request has been in your queue since late 2007, do you have any thoughts about actually implementing it?

Bob

[Craig]

We're looking into making Michael's suggestion the new default behavior, with an option to ignore the changes entirely. For v4 we're considering making the second behavior the default.

[BamaBob]

I know that many software developers (myself included) cringe when someone asks when a feature will be available. But, I'll ask anyway. Do you have any feel for when Michael's change will be available in BC 3?

[Aaron]

Hello,

We don't have a set schedule for it yet, but it is something we are still investigating. :)

[Michael Bulgrien]

We're looking into making Michael's suggestion the new default behavior, with an option to ignore the changes entirely...

I am testing this in BC 3.2 beta and like how it has been implemented. Thank you.

[stritch000]

I'm so glad to see this has been added. It's marvellous. It will save me much time and effort. Thank you.