Search Results

Search found 741 results on 30 pages for 'merging'.

Page 10/30 | < Previous Page | 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17  | Next Page >

  • Entity Framework - Merging 2 physical tables into one "virtual" table problems...

    - by Keith Barrows
    I have been reading up on porting ASP.NET Membership Provider into .NET 3.5 using LINQ & Entities. However, the DB model that every single sample shows is the newer model while I've inherited a rather old model. Differences: The User Table is split into a pair of User & Membership Tables. All of the tables in the DB are prepended with aspnet_ I have Lowered versions of some columns (UserName, Email, etc) To work with this I have copied the properties from the Membership table into the User table (in the DB this is a 1<-1 relationship, not a 1<-0,1), renamed aspnet_Applications to Application, aspnet_Profiles to Profile, aspnet_Users to User and aspnet_Roles to Role. (See image) Link to full size image of model Now, I am running into one of 2 problems when I try to compile. Using the model in the image I get this error: Problem in Mapping Fragment starting at line 464: EntitySets 'UserSet' and 'aspnet_Membership' are both mapped to table 'aspnet_Membership'. Their Primary Keys may collide. If I delete the aspnet_Membership table from my model (to handle the above error) I then get: Problem in Mapping Fragment starting at line 384: Column aspnet_Membership.ApplicationId in table aspnet_Membership must be mapped: It has no default value and is not nullable. My ability to hand edit the backing stores is not the best and I don't want to just hack something in that may break other things. I am looking for suggestions, best practices, etc to handle this. Note: Moving the data tables themselves is not an option as I cannot replace all the logic in the existing apps. I am building this EF Provider for a new App. Over the next 6 months the old app(s) will migrate bit-by-bit to the new structures. Note: I added a link just under the image to the full size image for better viewing.

    Read the article

  • What is a faster way of merging the values of this Python structure into a single dictionary?

    - by jcoon
    I've refactored how the merged-dictionary (all_classes) below is created, but I'm wondering if it can be more efficient. I have a dictionary of dictionaries, like this: groups_and_classes = {'group_1': {'class_A': [1, 2, 3], 'class_B': [1, 3, 5, 7], 'class_c': [1, 2], # ...many more items like this }, 'group_2': {'class_A': [11, 12, 13], 'class_C': [5, 6, 7, 8, 9] }, # ...and many more items like this } A function creates a new object from groups_and_classes like this (the function to create this is called often): all_classes = {'class_A': [1, 2, 3, 11, 12, 13], 'class_B': [1, 3, 5, 7, 9], 'class_C': [1, 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9] } Right now, there is a loop that does this: all_classes = {} for group in groups_and_classes.values(): for c, vals in group.iteritems(): for v in vals: if all_classes.has_key(c): if v not in all_classes[c]: all_classes[c].append(v) else: all_classes[c] = [v] So far, I changed the code to use a set instead of a list since the order of the list doesn't matter and the values need to be unique: all_classes = {} for group in groups_and_classes.values(): for c, vals in group.iteritems(): try: all_classes[c].update(set(vals)) except KeyError: all_classes[c] = set(vals) This is a little nicer, and I didn't have to convert the sets to lists because of how all_classes is used in the code. Question: Is there a more efficient way of creating all_classes (aside from building it at the same time groups_and_classes is built, and changing everywhere this function is called)?

    Read the article

  • How are deleted and renamed/moved files handled when merging a feature branch with trunk and reinteg

    - by Michael Repucci
    I've got a big-ish project that needs a lot of work on a new feature, so I planned on using a branch to do this work. I haven't had to do this before, and I just wanted to get assurance from an experienced Subversion user that things "should" work smoothly. What I'm especially concerned with is how well Subversion handles deleted, renamed/moved files between a branch and the trunk. That is, if multiple files are deleted or renamed/moved in the branch, but those files continue to be used and receive changes in the trunk, will merges with the trunk still proceed without a hitch (reworking the branch, of course, as necessary)? Also, when I then reintegrate the branch with the trunk, if the files differ greatly in name (or existence) between the trunk and branch, will the reintegration be difficult? Will the files deleted (moved) in the branch now be deleted (moved) in the trunk, or will files linger and conflicts emerge? The SVN book didn't clear up these questions for me, so your experience would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

    Read the article

  • CM and Agile validation process of merging to the Trunk?

    - by LoneCM
    Hello All, We are a new Agile shop and we are encountering an issue that I hope others have seen. In our process, the Trunk is considered an integration branch; it does not have to be releasable, but it does have to be stable and functional for others to branch off of. We create Feature branches of the Trunk for new development. All work and testing occurs in these branches. An individual branch pulls up as needed to stay integrated with the Trunk as other features that are accepted and are committed. But now we have numerous feature branches. Each are focused, have a short life cycle, and are pushed to the trunk as they are completed, so we not debating the need for the branches and trying very much to be Agile. My issue comes in here: I require that the branches pull up from the Trunk at the end of their life cycle and complete the validation, regression testing and handle all configuration issues before pushing to the trunk. Once reintegrated into the Trunk, I ask for at least a build and an automated smoke test. However, I am now getting push back on the Trunk validation. The argument is that the developers can merge the code and not need the QA validation steps because they already complete the work in the feature branch. Therefore, the extra testing is not needed. I have attempted to remind management of the numerous times "brainless" merges have failed. Thier solution is to instead of build and regression testing to have the developer diff the Feature branch and the newly merged Trunk. That process in thier mind would replace the regression testing I asked for. So what do you require when you reintegrate back to the Trunk? What are the issues that we will encounter if we remove this step and replace with the diff? Is the cost of staying Agile the additional work of the intergration of the branches? Thanks for any input. LoneCM

    Read the article

  • Can I version dotfiles within a project without merging their history into the main line?

    - by istrasci
    I'm sure this title is fairly obscure. I'm wondering if there is some way in git to tell it that you want a certain file to use different versions of a file when moving between branches, but to overall be .gitignored from the repository. Here's my scenario: I've got a Flash Builder project (for a Flex app) that I control with git. Flex apps in Flash Builder projects create three files: .actionScriptProperties, .flexProperties, and .project. These files contain lots of local file system references (source folders, output folders, etc.), so naturally we .gitignore them from our repo. Today, I wanted to use a new library in my project, so I made a separate git branch called lib, removed the old version of the library and put in the new one. Unfortunately, this Flex library information gets stored in one of those three dot files (not sure which offhand). So when I had to switch back to the first branch (master) earlier, I was getting compile errors because master was now linked to the new library (which basically negated why I made lib in the first place). So I'm wondering if there's any way for me to continue to .gitignore these files (so my other developers don't get them), but tell git that I want it to use some kind of local "branch version" so I can locally use different versions of the files for different branches.

    Read the article

  • O(log n) algorithm for merging lists and computing rank?

    - by Eternal Learner
    Given two sorted lists, each containing n real numbers, is there a O(log?n) time algorithm to compute the element of rank i (where i coresponds to index in increasing order) in the union of the two lists, assuming the elements of the two lists are distinct? I can think of using a Merge procedure to merge the 2 lists and then find the A[i] element in constant time. But the Merge would take O(n) time. How do we solve it in O(log n) time?

    Read the article

  • How to catch-up named mercurial branch from default branch without merging the two into one?

    - by Dynite
    I have two branches in mercurial.. default named |r1 |r2 |r3 -------- named branch created here. | |r4 | |r5 | r6 | | |r7 | | -----------> | r8 How do I achieve this catch-up? | | I want to update the named branch from default, but I'm not ready to merge the branches yet. How do I achieve this? Edit: Additionally, what would the operation be using the GUI? Is it.. right-click r6, merge with..., r8,... then what? commit to named branch?

    Read the article

  • 2 or more FOR loops in command shell merging fileA line1 with fileB line1, &c.

    - by rfransix
    Hi, i'm trying to build an ldif import file. I have 2 files, one with the DN and another with the employeeNumber, they match up line for line. Here's the code that does not work: @echo on ::Set BATCH Input Directory set batchdir=e:\Meta ::Set the input file containing the server list set infile=%batchdir%\DDNs3 set infile2=%batchdir%\DDNs4 ::If exists, we remove output file Rm DDNs3.ldif ::For loop below process each line in the input list. FOR /F "tokens=* delims=" %%i IN (%infile%) do ( FOR /F "tokens=* delims=" %%k IN (%infile2%) do ( Echo dn: %%i Echo changetype: modify Echo replace: employeeNumber Echo employeeNumber: %%k ) ) DDNs3.ldif I've tried several variations, including: ::For loop below process each line in the input list. FOR /F "tokens=* delims=" %%i IN (%infile%) do ( Echo dn: %%i Echo changetype: modify Echo replace: employeeNumber FOR /F "tokens=* delims=" %%k IN (%infile2%) do ( Echo employeeNumber: %%k echo. ) ) DDNs3.ldif

    Read the article

  • To branch or not to branch?

    - by Idsa
    Till recently my development workflow was the following: Get the feature from product owner Make a branch (if feature is more than 1 day) Implement it in a branch Merge changes from main branch to my branch (to reduce conflicts during backward merging) Merge my branch back to main branch Sometimes there were problems with merging, but in general I liked it. But recently I see more and more followers of idea to not make branches as it makes more difficult to practice continuous integration, continuous delivery, etc. And it sounds especially funny from people with distributed VCS background who were talking so much about great merging implementations of Git, Mercurial, etc. So the question is should we use branches nowadays?

    Read the article

  • WSAECONNRESET (10054) error using WebDrive to map to a Subversion/Apache WebDAV share

    - by Dylan Beattie
    Hello, I'm using WebDrive to map a drive letter to a WebDAV share running on Subversion with the SVNAutoversioning flag enabled. The Subversion server is running CollabNet Subversion Edge with LDAP authentication. When trying to connect using WebDrive, I get: Connecting to site myserver Connecting to http://myserver/webdrive/ Resolving url myserver to an IP address Url resolved to IP address 192.168.0.12 Connecting to 192.168.0.12 on port 80 Connected successfully to the server on port 80 Testing directory listing ... Connecting to 192.168.0.12 on port 80 Connected successfully to the server on port 80 Unable to connect to server, error information below Error: Socket receive failure (4507) Operation: Connecting to server Winsock Error: WSAECONNRESET (10054) The httpd.conf file running on the server contains the following section: <Location /webdrive/> DAV svn SVNParentPath "C:\Program Files\Subversion\data\repositories" SVNReposName "My Subversion WebDrive" AuthzSVNAccessFile "C:\Program Files\Subversion\data/conf/svn_access_file" SVNListParentPath On Allow from all AuthType Basic AuthName "My Subversion Repository" AuthBasicProvider csvn-file-users ldap-users Require valid-user ModMimeUsePathInfo on SVNAutoversioning on </Location> and in the Apache error_yyyy_mm_dd.log file on the server, I'm seeing this when I try to connect via WebDAV: [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(379): [client 192.168.0.50] [5572] auth_ldap authenticate: using URL ldap://mydc/dc=mydomain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(484): [client 192.168.0.50] [5572] auth_ldap authenticate: accepting dylan.beattie [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [info] [client 192.168.0.50] Access granted: 'dylan.beattie' OPTIONS webdrive:/ [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(379): [client 192.168.0.50] [5572] auth_ldap authenticate: using URL ldap://mydc/dc=mydomain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(484): [client 192.168.0.50] [5572] auth_ldap authenticate: accepting dylan.beattie [Mon Jan 10 14:53:22 2011] [info] [client 192.168.0.50] Access granted: 'dylan.beattie' PROPFIND webdrive:/ [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Parent: child process exited with status 3221225477 -- Restarting. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xcd0f18 rmm=0xcd0f48 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xcd0f18 rmm=0xcd0f48 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] APR LDAP: Built with Microsoft Corporation. LDAP SDK [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] LDAP: SSL support unavailable: LDAP: CA certificates cannot be set using this method, as they are stored in the registry instead. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Apache/2.2.16 (Win32) DAV/2 SVN/1.6.13 configured -- resuming normal operations [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Server built: Oct 4 2010 19:55:36 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Parent: Created child process 4368 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(487): Parent: Sent the scoreboard to the child [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xca2bb0 rmm=0xca2be0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xca2bb0 rmm=0xca2be0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] APR LDAP: Built with Microsoft Corporation. LDAP SDK [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] LDAP: SSL support unavailable: LDAP: CA certificates cannot be set using this method, as they are stored in the registry instead. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [error] python_init: Python version mismatch, expected '2.5', found '2.5.4'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [error] python_init: Python executable found 'C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\bin\\httpd.exe'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [error] python_init: Python path being used 'C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\python25.zip;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\DLLs;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib\\plat-win;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib\\lib-tk;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\bin'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] mod_python: Creating 8 session mutexes based on 0 max processes and 64 max threads. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Child 4368: Child process is running [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(408): Child 4368: Retrieved our scoreboard from the parent. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] Parent: Duplicating socket 288 and sending it to child process 4368 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] Parent: Duplicating socket 276 and sending it to child process 4368 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(564): Child 4368: retrieved 2 listeners from parent [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Child 4368: Acquired the start mutex. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Child 4368: Starting 64 worker threads. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(605): Parent: Sent 2 listeners to child 4368 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Child 4368: Starting thread to listen on port 49159. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [notice] Child 4368: Starting thread to listen on port 80. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(379): [client 192.168.0.50] [4368] auth_ldap authenticate: using URL ldap://mydc/dc=mydomain,dc=com?sAMAccountName?sub [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [debug] mod_authnz_ldap.c(484): [client 192.168.0.50] [4368] auth_ldap authenticate: accepting dylan.beattie [Mon Jan 10 14:53:25 2011] [info] [client 192.168.0.50] Access granted: 'dylan.beattie' PROPFIND webdrive:/ [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Parent: child process exited with status 3221225477 -- Restarting. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xcd4f90 rmm=0xcd4fc0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xcd4f90 rmm=0xcd4fc0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] APR LDAP: Built with Microsoft Corporation. LDAP SDK [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] LDAP: SSL support unavailable: LDAP: CA certificates cannot be set using this method, as they are stored in the registry instead. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Apache/2.2.16 (Win32) DAV/2 SVN/1.6.13 configured -- resuming normal operations [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Server built: Oct 4 2010 19:55:36 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Parent: Created child process 5440 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(487): Parent: Sent the scoreboard to the child [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xda2bb0 rmm=0xda2be0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] util_ldap.c(1990): LDAP merging Shared Cache conf: shm=0xda2bb0 rmm=0xda2be0 for VHOST: myserver.mydomain.com [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] APR LDAP: Built with Microsoft Corporation. LDAP SDK [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] LDAP: SSL support unavailable: LDAP: CA certificates cannot be set using this method, as they are stored in the registry instead. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [error] python_init: Python version mismatch, expected '2.5', found '2.5.4'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [error] python_init: Python executable found 'C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\bin\\httpd.exe'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [error] python_init: Python path being used 'C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\python25.zip;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\DLLs;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib\\plat-win;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\Python25\\\\lib\\lib-tk;C:\\Program Files\\Subversion\\bin'. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] mod_python: Creating 8 session mutexes based on 0 max processes and 64 max threads. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Child 5440: Child process is running [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(408): Child 5440: Retrieved our scoreboard from the parent. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] Parent: Duplicating socket 288 and sending it to child process 5440 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [info] Parent: Duplicating socket 276 and sending it to child process 5440 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(564): Child 5440: retrieved 2 listeners from parent [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Child 5440: Acquired the start mutex. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Child 5440: Starting 64 worker threads. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [debug] mpm_winnt.c(605): Parent: Sent 2 listeners to child 5440 [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Child 5440: Starting thread to listen on port 49159. [Mon Jan 10 14:53:28 2011] [notice] Child 5440: Starting thread to listen on port 80. Browsing http://myserver/webdrive/ from a web browser is working fine, and I have a similar set-up working perfectly on a different SVN server that isn't running Collabnet but has had Subversion and Apache installed and configured separately. Any ideas? The python version error might be red herring - I've seen it in a couple of places in the log files and in other scenarios it doesn't appear to be breaking anything...

    Read the article

  • Distributed version control systems merge easiness details

    - by Idsa
    I have just read Joel's blogpost concerning distributed version control systems and can't understand the main idea. He says that SVN thinks in terms of versions while Mercurial thinks in terms of changes. And, according to Joel, it solves merging problems. I heard this idea several times and still haven't conceived it. As I know, SVN's merging mechanism is based on changes (diffs) too. So what is the difference? I have no experience with distributed version control systems but I actively use SVN branching/merging and had no serious problems with it. Of course there are merging conflicts sometimes (when one piece of code was changed in both branches). But I see no way how this problem can be solved automatically by some kind of control version system.

    Read the article

  • Best practice with branching source code and application lifecycle

    - by Toni Frankola
    We are a small ISV shop and we usually ship a new version of our products every month. We use Subversion as our code repository and Visual Studio 2010 as our IDE. I am aware a lot of people are advocating Mercurial and other distributed source control systems but at this point I do not see how we could benefit from these, but I might be wrong. Our main problem is how to keep branches and main trunk in sync. Here is how we do things today: Release new version (automatically create a tag in Subversion) Continue working on the main trunk that will be released next month And the cycle repeats every month and works perfectly. The problem arises when an urgent service release needs to be released. We cannot release it from the main trunk (2) as it is under heavy development and it is not stable enough to be released urgently. In such case we do the following: Create a branch from the tag we created in step (1) Bug fix Test and release Push the change back to main trunk (if applicable) Our biggest problem is merging these two (branch with main). In most cases we cannot rely on automatic merging because e.g.: a lot of changes has been made to main trunk merging complex files (like Visual Studio XML files etc.) does not work very well another developer / team made changes you do not understand and you cannot just merge it So what you think is the best practice to keep these two different versions (branch and main) in sync. What do you do?

    Read the article

  • Word 2010 & Outlook 2007 - HTML Mail Merge Doesn't Work, Plain Text and Attachments do

    - by Prejay
    Hopefully someone has an answer or fix for this. When using Outlook 2007 & Word 2007 or Word 2010 & Outlook 2010, Mail merging Works fine. However there are some systems that have Word 2010 and Outlook 2007 installed. In these cases, Mail Merging to HTML Emails doesn't do anything. If i choose to Mail Merge to Plain text emails or attachments, these go through Outlook. Only HTML Email doesn't work. Now, something like Mapi Labs Mail Merge toolkit is abole to get around this, but I was wondering if there was any statement/solution on cross version support for HTML Mail Merging from Microsoft.

    Read the article

  • What git branching models actually work - the final question

    - by UncleCJ
    In our company we have successfully deployed git and we are currently using a simple trunk/release/hotfixes branching model. However, this has it's problems, I have some key issues of confusion in the community which would be awesome to have answered here. Maybe my hopes for an Alexander stroke are too great, quite possibly I'll decompose this question into more manageable issues, but here's my first shot. Workflows / branching models - below are the three main descriptions of this I have seen, but they are partially contradicting each other or don't go far enough to sort out the subsequent issues we've run into (as described below). Thus our team so far defaults to not so great solutions. Are you doing something better? gitworkflows(7) Manual Page (nvie) A successful Git branching model (reinh) A Git Workflow for Agile Teams Merging vs rebasing (tangled vs sequential history) - the bids on this are as confusing as it gets. Should one pull --rebase or wait with merging back to the mainline until your task is finished? Personally I lean towards merging since this preserves a visual illustration of on which base a task was started and finished, and I even prefer merge --no-ff for this purpose. It has other drawbacks however. Also many haven't realized the useful property of merging - that it isn't commutative (merging a topic branch into master does not mean merging master into the topic branch). I am looking for a natural workflow - sometimes mistakes happen because our procedures don't capture a specific situation with simple rules. For example a fix needed for earlier releases should of course be based sufficiently downstream to be possible to merge upstream into all branches necessary (is the usage of these terms clear enough?). However it happens that a fix makes it into the master before the developer realizes it should have been placed further downstream, and if that is already pushed (even worse, merged or something based on it) then the option remaining is cherry-picking, with it's associated perils... What simple rules like such do you use? Also in this is included the awkwardness of one topic branch necessarily excluding other topic branches (assuming they are branched from a common baseline). Developers don't want to finish a feature to start another one feeling like the code they just wrote is not there anymore How to avoid creating merge conflicts (due to cherry-pick)? What seems like a sure way to create a merge conflict is to cherry-pick between branches, they can never be merged again? Would applying the same commit in revert (how to do this?) in either branch possibly solve this situation? This is one reason I do not dare to push for a largely merge-based workflow. How to decompose into topical branches? - We realize that it would be awesome to assemble a finished integration from topic branches, but often work by our developers is not clearly defined (sometimes as simple as "poking around") and if some code has already gone into a "misc" topic, it can not be taken out of there again, according to the question above? How do you work with defining/approving/graduating/releasing your topic branches? Proper procedures like code review and graduating would of course be lovely, but we simply cannot keep things untangled enough to manage this - any suggestions? integration branches, illustration please? Vote and comment as much as you'd like, I'll try to keep the issue page clear and informative enough. Thanks! Below is a list of related topics on stackoverflow I have checked out: What are some good strategies to allow deployed applications to be hotfixable? Workflow description for git usage for in-house development Git workflow for corporate Linux kernel development How do you maintain development code and production code? (thanks for this PDF!) git releases management Git Cherry-pick vs Merge Workflow How to cherry-pick multiple commits How do you merge selective files with git-merge? How to cherry pick a range of commits and merge into another branch ReinH Git Workflow git workflow for making modifications you’ll never push back to origin Cherry-pick a merge Proper Git workflow for combined OS and Private code? Maintaining Project with Git Why cant Git merge file changes with a modified parent/master. Git branching / rebasing good practices When will "git pull --rebase" get me in to trouble?

    Read the article

  • How to merge .rpmnew files in Pluggable Authentication Modules (PAM)?

    - by Question Overflow
    A few .rpmnew files are being created after performing an upgrade of the Fedora OS. The normal procedure for merging .rpmnew files into the original ones is to compare the differences, make the necessary changes to the configuration on the .rpmnew files, and replace the original files with the new ones. However, the files contained in /etc/pam.d are links to files with same the filename appended with -ac, example: password-auth links to password-auth-ac and has password-auth.rpmnew as upgrade. How do I go about merging these files?

    Read the article

  • How to properly update a feature branch from trunk?

    - by Pavel Radzivilovsky
    SVN book says: ...Another way of thinking about this pattern is that your weekly sync of trunk to branch is analogous to running svn update in a working copy, while the final merge step is analogous to running svn commit from a working copy I find this approach very unpractical in large developments, for several reasons, mostly related to reintegration step. From SVN v1.5, merging is done rev-by-rev. Cherry-picking the areas to be merged would cause us to resolve the trunk-branch conflicts twice (one when merging trunk revisions to the FB, and once more when merging back). Repository size: trunk changes might be significant for a large code base, and copying the differences files (unlike SVN copy) from trunk elsewhere may be a significant overhead. Instead, we do what we call "re-branching". In this case, when a significant chunk of trunk changes is needed, a new feature branch is opened from current trunk, and the merge is always downward (Feature branches - trunk - stable branches). This does not go along SVN book guidelines and developers see it as extra pain. How do you handle this situation?

    Read the article

  • How to line up columns using paste(1)? or how to make an aligned table merging lines in the shell?

    - by nn
    Hi, I want to merge lines such that the merged lines are aligned on the same boundary. UNIX paste(1) does this nicely when lines all meet at the same tab boundary, but when lines differ in size (in the file that lines are being merged into), the text comes out awkward. Example of paste(1) that has the desired effect: $ echo -e "a\nb\nccc\nd" | paste - - a b ccc d Example of paste(1) with undesired effect: $ echo -e "a\nb\ncccccccccccc\nd" | paste - - a b cccccccccccc d Note how the 2nd column doesn't line up. I want 'b' to line up with 'd', which requires an additional tab. Unfortunately I believe this is the limit for the paste utility, so if anyone has any idea of how to get the desired effect above, I'd love to hear it.

    Read the article

  • Useful git commit messages for merged branches

    - by eykanal
    As a follow-up to this question: If I'm working on a team by myself, I can maintain useful commit messages when merging branches by squashing all the commits to a single diff and then merging that diff. That way I can easily see what changes were introduced in the branch, and I have a single summary describing the feature/change/whatever that was accomplished in that branch when browsing the master branch. My question now is, how can I accomplish this when working with a team? In that situation, the branches will be pushed to a remote repository, meaning that I can't squash all the commits in the branch down to a single commit. If the branch is public, can I still have a single useful merge commit in the master branch? (By "useful" I mean that the commit in the master line tells me (1) a useful summary of what was done in the branch and (2) diffs of the same.)

    Read the article

  • Looking for the better way to combine deep architecture refactoring with feature based development

    - by voroninp
    Problem statement: Given: TFS as Source Control Heavy desktop client application with tons of legacy code with bad or almost absent architecture design. Clients constantly requiring new features with sound quality, fast delivery and constantly complaining on user unfriendly UI. Problem: Application undoubtedly requires deep refactoring. This process inevitably makes application unstable and dedicated stabilization phase is needed. We've tried: Refactoring in master with periodical merges from master (MB) to feature branch (FB). (my mistake) Result: Many unstable branches. What we are advised: Create additional branch for refactoring (RB) periodically synchronizing it with MB via merge from MB to RB. After RB is stabilized we substitute master with RB and create new branch for further refactoring. This is the plan. But here I expect the real hell of merging MB to RB after merging any FB to MB. The main advantage: Stable master most of the time. Are there any better alternatives to the procees?

    Read the article

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