Skip to content

Conversation

@JLLeitschuh
Copy link
Member

This provides a cleaner UI experience.
You are now only requested to save when an event dirties the save file.
The deployer now also ensures that you have not dirtied the save.

@ThomasJClark
Copy link
Contributor

IMO we should implement undo/redo instead. With undo/redo implemented, determining if the project has changed should be easy, and obviously it's also useful to be able to undo things.

We could theoretically implement the two features separately, but that means that undoing and redoing something will still make the project "dirty"

@codecov-io
Copy link

Current coverage is 48.01%

Merging #359 into master will decrease coverage by -0.25% as of 5d9e061

@@            master    #359   diff @@
======================================
  Files          124     125     +1
  Stmts         3698    3707     +9
  Branches       402     404     +2
  Methods          0       0       
======================================
- Hit           1785    1780     -5
  Partial        111     111       
- Missed        1802    1816    +14

Review entire Coverage Diff as of 5d9e061


Uncovered Suggestions

  1. +0.73% via ...loyerController.java#102...128
  2. +0.70% via ...tionsController.java#68...93
  3. +0.60% via ...InstanceManager.java#182...203
  4. See 7 more...

Powered by Codecov. Updated on successful CI builds.

@JLLeitschuh
Copy link
Member Author

That is really hard to get right.
@bradamiller

I spent a few hours on it before. I agree that it's a feature that could be added. The events that are fired when an undo/redo event happens are the same events that this deals with so I'm not sure if the two are mutually exclusive.

@JaciBrunning
Copy link
Member

I think Dirty saves is a good feature to implement until we find a suitable way to go about undo/redo operations. I think both these features should be implemented in the near future.

@JLLeitschuh
Copy link
Member Author

I agree with what @JacisNonsense said

This provides a cleaner UI experience.
You are now only requested to save when an event dirties the save file.
The deployer now also ensures that you have not dirtied the save.
@JLLeitschuh JLLeitschuh force-pushed the feat/saveDirtyCheckEvent branch from 7fe93d4 to 2ccab9b Compare May 1, 2016 18:47
@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

Before merging can we add a UI indicator that the pipeline is dirty? Many apps add an asterisk after the file name in the title bar to indicate the file is dirty.

@JLLeitschuh
Copy link
Member Author

@AustinShalit How's this coming?

@AustinShalit AustinShalit added this to the v2.0.0 milestone Jul 30, 2016
@AustinShalit
Copy link
Member

#647 completes this feature.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants