[jira] Commented: (SCM-258) The perforce provider should be able to accept complex filespecs using a clientspec rather than the path in the SCM url

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-258?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#action_102719 ] Dana Lacoste commented on SCM-258: -- I haven't investigated the code since November 2006, but at that time, Brian, but at that

[jira] Commented: (SCM-258) The perforce provider should be able to accept complex filespecs using a clientspec rather than the path in the SCM url

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-258?page=comments#action_81937 ] Dana Lacoste commented on SCM-258: -- Unfortunately, the same problem as in the other issue occurs: update and checkout are the same, and they both (in the first try {} block

[jira] Commented: (SCM-257) The perforce provider should provide an "update" functionality for the SCM plugin's "update" command that is semantically correct.

[ http://jira.codehaus.org/browse/SCM-257?page=comments#action_81936 ] Dana Lacoste commented on SCM-257: -- Although persist.checkout will work for keeping a clientspec persistent (after the checkout command runs), it won't allow for using an exi

[jira] Created: (SCM-258) The perforce provider should be able to accept complex filespecs using a clientspec rather than the path in the SCM url

The perforce provider should be able to accept complex filespecs using a clientspec rather than the path in the SCM url --- Key: SCM-258 URL: http:

[jira] Created: (SCM-257) The perforce provider should provide an "update" functionality for the SCM plugin's "update" command that is semantically correct.

The perforce provider should provide an "update" functionality for the SCM plugin's "update" command that is semantically correct. -- Key: SCM-257