Search Results

Search found 3270 results on 131 pages for 'git mv'.

Page 10/131 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

• Cherry-picking from git to svn (or, How to keep a project history in git and releases in svn)

  - by Jawa

  I'm in a position where I'm the only one using git, everybody else is using svn. I've used 'git svn' to connect to the team svn and mostly it works just fine. Lately, I've started a project initially on my own, separate git repo and now I need to merge stuff from it to the svn. However, I still would like to keep tweaking the implementation in my own privacy between releases. So, what would be the most straightforward way to cherry-pick some commits from my private repo to the svn-cloned repo? Requirement is to keep full local history and have only one svn commit for each pick. Or is there some squashing to be done? As a method to achieve this, is there a way to get the private repo as another origin for the svn-cloned repo?

  Read the article

• Using Mercurial repository inside a Git one: Feasible? Sane?

  - by Portablejim

  I am thinking on creating a Mercurial repository under a Git repository. e.g. ..../git-repository/directory/hg-repo/ The 2 repositories Is it possible to manage (keeping your sanity)? How similiar is it to this? I am a computer science student at University. I manage my work in Git, mainly as a distribution mechanism (after realizing that rsync fails when you have changes in more than one place) between my desktop and usb drive. I try use of Git as a VCS as I do work. I have finished a semester where I did a small group project to prepare for a larger group project next year. We had to use Subversion, and experienced the joys of a centralised VCS (including downtime). I tried to keep the subversion repository separate to my Git repository for the subject**, however it was annoying that it was seperate (not in the place where I store assignments). I therefore moved to using an Subversion repository inside my Git repository. As I think ahead (maybe I am thinking too far ahead) I realise that I will have to try and convince people to use a DVCS and Mercurial will probably be the one that is preferred (Windows and Mac GUI support, closer to Subversion). Having done some research into the whole Git vs Mercurial debate (however not used Mercurial at all) I still prefer Git. Can I have a Mercurial repository inside a Git one without going mad (or it ruining something)? Or is it something that I should not consider at all? (Or is it a bad question that should be deleted?) ** I think outside of Australia it is called a course

  Read the article

• Rebasing a branch which is public

  - by Dror

  I'm failing to understand how to use git-rebase, and I consider the following example. Let's start a repository in ~/tmp/repo: $ git init Then add a file foo $ echo "hello world" > foo which is then added and committed: $ git add foo $ git commit -m "Added foo" Next, I started a remote repository. In ~/tmp/bare.git I ran $ git init --bare In order to link repo to bare.git I ran $ git remote add origin ../bare.git/ $ git push --set-upstream origin master Next, lets branch, add a file and set an upstream for the new branch b1: $ git checkout -b b1 $ echo "bar" > foo2 $ git add foo2 $ git commit -m "add foo2 in b1" $ git push --set-upstream origin b1 Now it is time to switch back to master and change something there: $ echo "change foo" > foo $ git commit -a -m "changed foo in master" $ git push At this point in master the file foo contain changed foo, while in b1 it is still hello world. Finally, I want to sync b1 with the progress made in master. $ git checkout b1 $ git fetch origin $ git rebase origin/master At this point git st returns: # On branch b1 # Your branch and 'origin/b1' have diverged, # and have 2 and 1 different commit each, respectively. # (use "git pull" to merge the remote branch into yours) # nothing to commit, working directory clean At this point the content of foo in the branch b1 is change foo as well. So what does this warning mean? I expected I should do a git push, git suggests to do git pull... According to this answer, this is more or less it, and in his comment @FrerichRaabe explicitly say that I don't need to do a pull. What's going on here? What is the danger, how should one proceed? How should the history be kept consistent? What is the interplay between the case described above and the following citation: Do not rebase commits that you have pushed to a public repository. taken from pro git book. I guess it is somehow related, and if not I would love to know why. What's the relation between the above scenario and the procedure I described in this post.

  Read the article

• Git workflow for small teams

  - by janos

  I'm working on a git workflow to implement in a small team. The core ideas in the workflow: there is a shared project master that all team members can write to all development is done exclusively on feature branches feature branches are code reviewed by a team member other than the branch author the feature branch is eventually merged into the shared master and the cycle starts again The article explains the steps in this cycle in detail: https://github.com/janosgyerik/git-workflows-book/blob/small-team-workflow/chapter05.md Does this make sense or am I missing something?

  Read the article

• How to cleanly add after-the-fact commits from the same feature into git tree

  - by Dennis

  I am one of two developers on a system. I make most of the commits at this time period. My current git workflow is as such: there is master branch only (no develop/release) I make a new branch when I want to do a feature, do lots of commits, and then when I'm done, I merge that branch back into master, and usually push it to remote. ...except, I am usually not done. I often come back to alter one thing or another and every time I think it is done, but it can be 3-4 commits before I am really done and move onto something else. Problem The problem I have now is that .. my feature branch tree is merged and pushed into master and remote master, and then I realize that I am not really done with that feature, as in I have finishing touches I want to add, where finishing touches may be cosmetic only, or may be significant, but they still belong to that one feature I just worked on. What I do now Currently, when I have extra after-the-fact commits like this, I solve this problem by rolling back my merge, and re-merging my feature branch into master with my new commits, and I do that so that git tree looks clean. One clean feature branch branched out of master and merged back into it. I then push --force my changes to origin, since my origin doesn't see much traffic at the moment, so I can almost count that things will be safe, or I can even talk to other dev if I have to coordinate. But I know it is not a good way to do this in general, as it rewrites what others may have already pulled, causing potential issues. And it did happen even with my dev, where git had to do an extra weird merge when our trees diverged. Other ways to solve this which I deem to be not so great Next best way is to just make those extra commits to the master branch directly, be it fast-forward merge, or not. It doesn't make the tree look as pretty as in my current way I'm solving this, but then it's not rewriting history. Yet another way is to wait. Maybe wait 24 hours and not push things to origin. That way I can rewrite things as I see fit. The con of this approach is time wasted waiting, when people may be waiting for a fix now. Yet another way is to make a "new" feature branch every time I realize I need to fix something extra. I may end up with things like feature-branch feature-branch-html-fix, feature-branch-checkbox-fix, and so on, kind of polluting the git tree somewhat. Is there a way to manage what I am trying to do without the drawbacks I described? I'm going for clean-looking history here, but maybe I need to drop this goal, if technically it is not a possibility.

  Read the article

• git workflow for separating commits

  - by gman

  Best practices with git (or any VCS for that matter) is supposed to be to have each commit do the smallest change possible. But, that doesn't match how I work at all. For example I recently I needed to add some code that checked if the version of a plugin to my system matched the versions the system supports. If not print a warning that the plugin probably requires a newer version of the system. While writing that code I decided I wanted the warnings to be colorized. I already had code that colorized error message so I edited that code. That code was in the startup module of one entry to the system. The plugin checking code was in another path that didn't use that entry point so I moved the colorization code into a separate module so both entry points could use it. On top of that, in order to test my plugin checking code works I need to go edit UI/UX code to make sure it tells the user "You need to upgrade". When all is said and done I've edited 10 files, changed dependencies, the 2 entry points are now both dependant on the colorization code, etc etc. Being lazy I'd probably just git add . && git commit -a the whole thing. Spending 10-15 minutes trying to manipulate all those changes into 3 to 6 smaller commits seems frustrating which brings up the question Are there workflows that work for you or that make this process easier? I don't think I can some how magically always modify stuff in the perfect order since I don't know that order until after I start modifying and seeing what comes up. I know I can git add --interactive etc but it seems, at least for me, kind of hard to know what I'm grabbing exactly the correct changes so that each commit is actually going to work. Also, since the changes are sitting in the current directory it doesn't seem like it would be easy to run tests on each commit to make sure it's going to work short of stashing all the changes. And then, if it were to stash and then run the tests, if I missed a few lines or accidentally added a few too many lines I have no idea how I'd easily recover from that. (as in either grab the missing lines from the stash and then put the rest back or take the few extra lines I shouldn't have grabbed and shove them into the stash for the next commit. Thoughts? Suggestions? PS: I hope this is an appropriate question. The help says development methodologies and processes

  Read the article

• Git autocomplete is asking for a password, not sure why

  - by Soldier.moth

  I'm running into an issue with autocomplete using git... I am using ubuntu 12.10 and when I perform the following keystrokes g i t Space Bar Tab I am presented with the error Pseudo-terminal will not be allocated because stdin is not a terminal. and prompted for a password. I am not clear how to go about troubleshooting this error, I have tried uninstalling and reinstalling git to no avail. Screenshot of terminal with error:

  Read the article

• Installinf Xen 4.0.1 in Ubuntu 10.10

  - by Hiranth

  make -f buildconfigs/mk.linux-2.6-pvops build make[3]: Entering directory /home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' set -ex; \ if ! [ -d linux-2.6-pvops.git ]; then \ rm -rf linux-2.6-pvops.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ mkdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; rmdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ git clone -o xen -n git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; \ (cd linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp; git checkout -b xen/stable-2.6.32.x xen/xen/stable-2.6.32.x ); \ mv linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp linux-2.6-pvops.git; \ fi + '[' -d linux-2.6-pvops.git ']' + rm -rf linux-2.6-pvops.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + mkdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + rmdir linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp + git clone -o xen -n git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/jeremy/xen.git linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp Initialized empty Git repository in /home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1/linux-2.6-pvops.git.tmp/.git/ fatal: Unable to look up git.kernel.org (port 9418) (Name or service not known) make[3]: *** [linux-2.6-pvops.git/.valid-src] Error 128 make[3]: Leaving directory/home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make[2]: * [linux-2.6-pvops-install] Error 2 make[2]: Leaving directory /home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make[1]: *** [install-kernels] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory/home/hirantha/xen-4.0.1' make: * [world] Error 2 hirantha@hirantha-desktop:~/xen-4.0.1$ ^C hirantha@hirantha-desktop:~/xen-4.0. What is this error? How can i solve this?

  Read the article

• What is a good git server frontend for self hosted git repositories

  - by Ritesh M Nayak

  I am planning on deploying git for a project I am currently working on and was wondering if there are any free softwares that provide an easy to use web view of the git repository. I am primarily interested in using the front end to track changes, see diff information etc. There is a list of such front ends available here. Does anyone have any experience with any of these ? Which one would you suggest An open source clone of github would do just fine actually :D but I know thats too much to ask .

  Read the article

• Deploying only changed part of a website with git to ftp (svn2web for git)

  - by Elazar Leibovich

  I'm having a website with many big images file. The source (as well as the images) is maintained with git. I wish to deploy that via ftp to a bluehost-like cheap server. I do not wish to deploy all the website each time (so that I won't have to upload too many unchanged files over and over), but to do roughly the following: In a git repository, mark the last deployed revision with a tag "deployed". When I say "deploy revision X", find out which files has changed between revision X and revision tagged as deploy, and upload just them. It is similar in spirit to svn2web. But I want that for DVCS. Mercurial alternative will be considered. It's a pretty simple script to write, but I'd rather not to reinvent the wheel if there's some similar script on the web. Capistrano and fab seems to know only how to push the whole revision, in their SCM integration. So I don't think I can currently use them.

  Read the article

• Git push origin master

  - by user306472

  I am new to git and recently set up a new account with github. I'm following a rails tutorial from Michael Hartl online ( http://www.railstutorial.org/book#fig:github_first_page ) and followed his instructions to set up my git which were also inline with the setup instructions at github. Anyways, the "Next Steps" section on github were: mkdir sample_app cd sample_app git init touch README git add README git commit -m 'first commit' git remote add origin [email protected]:rosdabos55/sample_app.git git push origin master I got all the way to the last instruction (git push origin master) without any problem. When I entered that last line into my terminal, however, I got this error message: "fatal: No path specified. See 'man git-pull' for valid url syntax." What might I be doing wrong?

  Read the article

• git-diff in another directory

  - by ABach

  I'm currently writing a little zsh function that checks all of my git repositories to see if they're dirty or not and then prints out the ones that need a commit. Thus far, I've figured out that the quickest way to figure out a git repository's clean/dirty status is via git-diff and git-ls-files: if ! git diff --quiet || git ls-files --others --exclude-standard; then state=":dirty" fi I have two questions for you folks: Does anyone know of a quicker, more efficient way to check for file changes/additions in a git repo? I want my zsh function to be handed a file path (say ~/Code/git-repos/) and check all of the repositories in it. Is there a way to do without having to cd into each directory and run those commands? Something like git-diff --quiet --git-dir="~/Code/git-repos/..." would be fantastic. Thanks! :)

  Read the article

• git and local modifications

  - by user362073

  Hi I am discovering how to use git. I just made the following test: create a folder and 2 files then git init, git add ., git commit -m "initial commit" create a branch: git branch experimental, git checkout experimental then change the name of the folder and delete one of the files, then git add ., git commit -m "experimental" go back to master: git checkout master Surprise: I do not find the master as I left it; the folder has disappeared. And I have to do a git -reset --hard to find my folder. I wonder if I did something wrong or if I have not understood how git manages local changes. Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• set a ftp repository with git

  - by enboig

  I want to change my repository from bazaar to git. I installed Git (winXP) and tortoise with no problem, I set path variables, etc... I have initialized my repository with: git init copied it using cd .. git clone --bare project.git uploaded it to FTP, and when trying to access: git clone *ftp_address* Initialized empty Git repository in D:/project/.git/ Password: error: Access denied: 530 while accessing *ftp_address*/info/refs fatal: HTTP request failed I checked and .../project.git/info/refs does not exists. What am I missing? thanks PD: *ftp_address* = 'ftp://user%[email protected]/git/project.git'

  Read the article

• Can I recover lost commits in a SVN repository using a local tracking git-svn branch?

  - by Ian Stevens

  A SVN repo I use git-svn to track was recently corrupted and a backup was recovered. However, a week's worth of commits were lost in the recovery. Is it possible to recover those lost commits using git-svn dcommit on my local git repo? Is it sufficient to run git-svn dcommit with the SHA1 of the last recovered commit in SVN? eg. > svn info http://tracked-svn/trunk | sed -n "s/Revision: //p" 252 > git log --grep="git-svn-id:.*@252" --format=oneline | cut -f1 -d" " 55bb5c9cbb5fe11a90ec2e9e1e0c7c502908cf9a > git svn dcommit 55bb5c9cbb5fe11a90ec2e9e1e0c7c502908cf9a Or will the git-svn-id need to be stripped from the intended commits? I tried this using --dry-run but couldn't tell whether it would try to submit all commits: > git svn dcommit --verbose --dry-run 55bb5c9cbb5fe11a90ec2e9e1e0c7c502908cf9a Committing to http://tracked-svn/trunk ... dcommitted on a detached HEAD because you gave a revision argument. The rewritten commit is: 55bb5c9cbb5fe11a90ec2e9e1e0c7c502908cf9a Thanks for your help.

  Read the article

• Is there a way to lock a branch in GIT

  - by Senthil A Kumar

  I have an idea of locking a repository from users pushing files into it by having a lock script in the GIT update hook since the push can only recognize the userid as arguments and not the branches. So i can lock the entire repo which is just locking a directory. Is there a way to lock a specific branch in GIT? Or is there a way an Update Hook can identify from which branch the user is pushing and to which branch the code is pushed?

  Read the article

• Find the git branch or branches from commit id

  - by Senthil A Kumar

  Hi All, Actually am try to get a report on merge conflicts. I used 'git blame' to see who has changed what line, but i couldn't find the branch and repository name information. Is there a way to find the repository name, branch name and author name of a file from 'git blame' or from commit ids' so that whenever a merge conflict occurs i can send an email to the authors who have touched that file/lines to resolve it. Thnaks Senthil A Kumar

  Read the article

• Git serve: I would like it that simple

  - by Setori

  I want to know how to simply publish over http = much like Mercurial's hg serve! On the Windows/work box do this: git serve and then on the Linux box SIMPLY go: git clone http://project project finished.

  Read the article

• GIT <> SVN interchangeable patch-files

  - by pagid

  Hi, I maintain a subproject which is running on the project's SVN server. I personally prefer to work with Git - the problem is that the entire community uses SVN, expects RFCs with a SVN compatible patch-file and people are familiar with SVN and send bugfixes agains that SVN repository too. Therefore my only problem is to create patch files which are compatible with Git and SVN at the same time. Is there some kind of smart shell-script or even a buildin feature I'm not aware of? Cheers

  Read the article

• Git: Fixing a bug affecting two branches

  - by Aram Kocharyan

  I'm basing my Git repo on http://nvie.com/posts/a-successful-git-branching-model/ and was wondering what happens if you have this situation: Say I'm developing on two feature branches A and B, and B requires code from A. The X node introduces an error in feature A which affects branch B, but this is not detected at node Y where feature A and B were merged and testing was conducted before branching out again and working on the next iteration. As a result, the bug is found at node Z by the people working on feature B. At this stage it's decided that a bugfix is needed. This fix should be applied to both features, since the people working on feature A also need the bug fixed, since its part of their feature. Should a bugfix branch be created from the latest feature A node (the one branching from node Y) and then merged with feature A? After which both features are merged into develop again and tested before branching out? The problem with this is that it requires both branches to merge to fix the issue. Since feature B doesn't touch code in feature A, is there a way to change the history at node Y by implementing the fix and still allowing the feature B branch to remain unmerged yet have the fixed code from feature A? Mildly related: Git bug branching convention

  Read the article

• How was Git designed?

  - by Mark Canlas

  My workplace recently switched to Git and I've been loving (and hating!) it. I really do love it, and it is extremely powerful. The only part I hate is that sometimes it's too powerful (and maybe a bit terse/confusing). My question is... How was Git designed? Just using it for a short amount of time, you get the feel that it can handle many obscure workflows that other version control systems could not. But it also feels elegant underneath. And fast! This is no doubt in part to Linus's talent. But I'm wondering, was the overall design of git based off of something? I've read about BitKeeper but the accounts are scant on technical details. The compression, the graphs, getting rid of revision numbers, emphasizing branching, stashing, remotes... Where did it all come from? Linus really knocked this one out of the park and on pretty much the first try! It's quite good to use once you're past the learning curve.

  Read the article

• Tracking contributions from contributors not using git

  - by alex.jordan

  I have a central git repo located on a server. I have many contributors that are not tech savvy, do not have server access, and do not know anything about git. But they are able to contribute via the project's web side. Each of them logs on via a web browser and contributes to the project. I have set things up so that when they log on, each user's contributions are made into a cloned repo on the server that is specifically for that user. Periodically, I log on to the server, visit each of their repos, and do a git diff to make sure they haven't done anything bad. If all is well, I commit their changes and push them to the central repo. Of course I need to manually look at their changes so that I can add an appropriate commit message. But I would also like to track who made the changes. I am making the commit, and I (and the web server) are the only users that are actually writing anything to the server. I could track this in the commit messages. While this strikes me as wrong, if this is my only option, is there a way to make userx's cloned repo always include "userx: " before each commit message that I add, so that I do not have to remind myself which user's repo I am in? Or even better, is there an easy way for me to make the commit, but in such a way as I credit the user whose cloned repo I am in?

  Read the article

• Single-developer GIT workflow (moving from straightforward FTP)

  - by melat0nin

  I'm trying to decide whether moving to VCS is sensible for me. I am a single web developer in a small organisation (5 people). I'm thinking of VCS (Git) for these reasons: version control, offsite backup, centralised code repository (can access from home). At the moment I work on a live server generally. I FTP in, make my edits and save them, then reupload and refresh. The edits are usually to theme/plugin files for CMSes (e.g. concrete5 or Wordpress). This works well but provides no backup and no version control. I'm wondering how best to integrate VCS into this procedure. I would envisage setting up a Git server on the company's web server, but I'm not clear how to push changes out to client accounts (usually VPSes on the same server) - at the moment I simply log into SFTP with their details and make the changes directly. I'm also not sure what would sensibly represent a repository - would each client's website get their own one? Any insights or experience would be really helpful. I don't think I need the full power of Git by any means, but basic version control and de facto cloud access would be really useful.

  Read the article

• How to get --detect-branches to work with git-p4?

  - by Michael Brennan

  My p4 repository has a structure similar to: //depot/project/branch1 //depot/project/branch2 //depot/project/branch3 ... etc However, when I use git-p4 to clone "project", all 3 branches are not considered as branches and all get cloned into the single master branch. This is how I'm invoking git-p4: git-p4 clone --detect-branches //depot/project I was expecting git-p4 to create a git database for "project" with three branches, and the root of the project would be mapped to the portion of the path after the branch name (for example: if //depot/project/branch1 has a subdirectory called "lib" (//depot/project/branch1/lib) then my local file system should be something like /git_project/lib with 3 git branches). Is what I'm expecting wrong? Am I invoking git-p4 incorrectly?

  Read the article

• Setting up Git / Apache on Windows

  - by yodaj007

  I'm following this tutorial to set up a personal Git server on Apache on my Windows 7 box. However, when I add the following to my httpd.conf, Apache throws an error when I try to start it. Can anyone assist in fixing whatever is wrong? SetEnv GIT_PROJECT_ROOT C:/Repositories SetEnv GIT_HTTP_EXPORT_ALL ScriptAliasMatch "(?x)^/(.*/(HEAD | info/refs | objects/(info/[^/]+ | [0-9a-f]{2}/[0-9a-f]{38} | pack/pack-[0-9a-f]{40}.(pack|idx)) | git-(upload|receive)-pack))$" "C:/Program Files (x86)/git/libexec/git-core/git-http-backend.exe/$1" This is a fresh install of Apache. The only other change I've made to the config file is telling Apache to listen on port 9000 (IIS is listening on 80). This is the error from my event logs: The Apache service named reported the following error: ScriptAliasMatch takes two arguments, a regular expression and a filename . I tried putting all of the text on one line, like so: ScriptAliasMatch "(?x)^/(.*/(HEAD | info/refs | objects/(info/[^/]+ | [0-9a-f]{2}/[0-9a-f]{38} | pack/pack-[0-9a-f]{40}.(pack|idx)) | git-(upload|receive)-pack))$" "C:/Program Files (x86)/git/libexec/git-core/git-http-backend.exe/$1" But nada.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >