Hello,
If there is already an option for this, or it has been discussed already, apologies, I just missed it.
I think it would be very helpful, and perhaps important, if BC for Mac had a way to treat folders that OSX believes are either packages or bundles as if they were one file. This is how the Finder treats them normally.
To illustrate this quickly, I created two folders. In the first one I placed a copy of the beta BC .app "file". In the other folder, I placed a later version of the beta BC .app "file" that I had just downloaded. The Folder Sync function reported:
Copy 508 files(s) to the left, 24.9 MB
Copy 148 files(s) to the right, 1009 KB
If I let that "update both" sync run, neither copy of "Beyond Compare.app" would match anything you released. That sort of thing would be bad. If a package or bundle were deep inside a folder tree, I might not see it until long after the damage was done.
Applications are not the only folders treated this way. It can be a problem for data packages as well. For example, Apple's Pages application creates packages that are really folder trees containing multiple files. Those folder names end with .pages. So does Aperture, using folder names ending with .aplibrary.
Apple has some information here, and elsewhere in their documentation as well:
https://developer.apple.com/library/...utBundles.html
Sometimes is it useful to see into a package or bundle, so probably this should be a toggle. I just think, for me, most of the time I would want them treated as single files and not as folder trees to avoid destroying them by merging incompatible contents.
Thanks,
George
If there is already an option for this, or it has been discussed already, apologies, I just missed it.
I think it would be very helpful, and perhaps important, if BC for Mac had a way to treat folders that OSX believes are either packages or bundles as if they were one file. This is how the Finder treats them normally.
To illustrate this quickly, I created two folders. In the first one I placed a copy of the beta BC .app "file". In the other folder, I placed a later version of the beta BC .app "file" that I had just downloaded. The Folder Sync function reported:
Copy 508 files(s) to the left, 24.9 MB
Copy 148 files(s) to the right, 1009 KB
If I let that "update both" sync run, neither copy of "Beyond Compare.app" would match anything you released. That sort of thing would be bad. If a package or bundle were deep inside a folder tree, I might not see it until long after the damage was done.
Applications are not the only folders treated this way. It can be a problem for data packages as well. For example, Apple's Pages application creates packages that are really folder trees containing multiple files. Those folder names end with .pages. So does Aperture, using folder names ending with .aplibrary.
Apple has some information here, and elsewhere in their documentation as well:
https://developer.apple.com/library/...utBundles.html
Sometimes is it useful to see into a package or bundle, so probably this should be a toggle. I just think, for me, most of the time I would want them treated as single files and not as folder trees to avoid destroying them by merging incompatible contents.
Thanks,
George
Comment