Compare local to server in the deployment selection dialog

[Scott Wells]

This is an offshoot of issue #151. In the deployment and selection dialog, it would be useful to be able to compare local files to their server counterparts before deploying. I look at this as analogous to reviewing the differences in a version control changelist before submitting it.

[June Bischoff]

Instead of being the only developer working in Illuminated Cloud, my whole team has moved over. This issue is critical to us being able to deploy code to a shared sandbox without overwriting each other, and may force a move back to Eclipse if not resolved relatively soon. :( Do you have a timeframe in mind?

(Related ticket #156 would also be very helpful but not as critical, and related ticket #151 is minor in comparison.)

[Scott Wells]

June, just so I understand the nature of the issue, are your users logging into the sandbox using a single set of credentials or using distinct credentials per-user? I ask because if the latter, you should be able to enable conflict detection for the connection and avoid stomping on each others' work. If the former, there's a separate enhancement (#152) to allow automatic conflict detection when users are logged in using a shared set of credentials.

This is obviously different from what's requested in this ticket, but I want to understand the core issue to make sure I'm able to provide the correct solution(s).

[June Bischoff]

We do log in with distinct credentials per-user. I'm not entirely comfortable with the conflict detection yet, as I've gotten some false positives (especially when merging changes from one environment to another.) I don't know of any false negatives, though.

[Scott Wells]

Okay, that helps. When you say false positives (some people use these terms the other way!), you mean that IC is telling you about a potential conflict when no such conflict actually exists, correct? And when you say you haven't seen any false negatives, you mean that to your knowledge, it hasn't failed to present an actual conflict so that it would be overwritten? Just want to make sure that there aren't issues with that feature that are leading to unexpected data/progress loss.

Back to this issue, if this is really critical to your team, I can definitely try to slot it in earlier. I have a few other relatively small items I need to address and I can put this on deck. Let me get out my current release and then I'll try to provide a prospective timeframe for it. My guess would be a few weeks.

[June Bischoff]

Yep, that's the correct interpretation.

The person it makes most nervous is my boss, who is a big fan of the Eclipse Synchronize feature. Would appreciate getting it in as soon as you can.

[Scott Wells]

Okay, and one more clarification since your boss likes Eclipse's Team Synchronization feature...is the ability to diff the local state of files requested for deployment to their current server state sufficient to alleviate those concerns?

[June Bischoff]

I mean, long term it would be amazing to be able to choose to deploy or retrieve on the fly by looking at diffs, but in the short term being able to diff local state vs current server state should do it. Issue #156 would put a flag on the file indicating whether it was different from the server based on the from the last deploy/retrieve, but as I said that's less immediately critical.

[Scott Wells]

Okay, thanks for all the info. I'll let you know a prospective timeline in the next few days.

[Scott Wells]

June, I'm going to include this in the next release which I hope to have out in the next couple of weeks.

[June Bischoff]

Great news, thank you!

[Scott Wells]

June, I haven't forgotten about this. Obviously the OST generation improvements jumped ahead of it. This and 2-3 other items are in my "next" list. I'll let you know when I get started on this one so you know it's in motion.

[Scott Wells]

Okay, I'm back from a week-long business trip but not quite at 100% yet (got stuck overnight in Charlotte due to Snowmageddon and currently operating on ~3 hours of sleep). I'm going to organize this work alongside a few other commitments and see if I can get them resolved soon. Give me a day or two to get things ordered properly and I'll give a revised estimate on delivery of the feature.

[Scott Wells]

June I'm currently working on #217, but this item is queued up directly behind that one. The order was chosen specifically because the work I'm doing in that issue will create a better foundation for this one. Take a look at the most recent comment I've added with a screenshot of the work-in-progress and hopefully it'll be clear why the two are related. Once I release an update with #217 I'll start on this one immediately.

[June Bischoff]

Sounds great!

[Scott Wells]

Delivered in 1.6.8.6.

[June Bischoff]

I love it already. Thank you!