Search Results

Search found 1748 results on 70 pages for 'branch prediction'.

Page 14/70 | < Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >

• We're Subversion Geeks and we want to know the benefits of Mercurial

  - by Matt

  Having read I'm a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS. I have a related follow up question. I read that question and read the recommended links and videos and I see the benefits but I don't see the overall mindshift people are talking about. Our team is of 8-10 developers that work on one large code base consisting of 60 projects. We use Subversion and have a main trunk. When a developer starts a new Fogbugz case they create a svn branch, do the work on the branch and when they're done they merge back to the trunk. Occasionally they may stay on the branch for an extended time and merge the trunk to the branch to pick up the changes. When I watched Linus talk about people creating a branch and never doing it again, that's not us at all. We create probably 50-100 branches a week without issue. The biggest challenge is the merging but we've gotten pretty good at that as well. I tend to merge by fogbugz case & checkin rather than the entire root of the branch. We never work remotely and we never make branches off of branches. If you're the only one working in that section of the code base then the merge to the trunk goes smoothly. If someone else had modified the same section of code then the merge can get messy and you might need to do some surgery. Conflicts are conflicts, I don't see how any system could get it right most of the time unless if was smart enough to understand the code. After creating a branch the following checkout of 60k+ files takes some time but that would be an issue with any source control system we'd use. Is there some benefit of any DVCS that we're not seeing that would be of great help to us?

  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

• Single file in a working copy (branch) pointing to trunk under TortoiseSVN?

  - by Camsoft

  Got a very strange problem. I've got a working copy which is from a branch. When I commit any changes from this working copy, one single file in the working copy gets committed to the trunk. If I right-click this single file and click Commit the SVN URL displayed points to the /trunk and not the branch. How on earth could this happen? I used TortoiseSVN to create the branch in the first place. How can I fix this?

  Read the article

• Having a fork match the original repo when the original master branch can't be merged in?

  - by a2h

  The related questions that SO offer me only answer simple cases that can be solved with a pull - however, that won't work for my case. There's a repository I've forked, with just a master branch, and I've forked it, and I've worked in both my master, and a new branch of my own, rw-style. The owner of the forked repository's committed some of my changes but not others; the black dots on the top right below represent commits from both my master and rw-style branches. I'm aware using the fork queue is not a good idea, so I'm staying away from it. Using git pull does work, but it creates a conflict that I would then need to resolve, and it also results in duplicate history for my master branch, and that doesn't look particularly pretty. I don't know any other solutions right now, so I'm currently considering just creating a patch from two commits that I haven't yet pushed, deleting my fork, creating it again from the original, and then applying my patches on top of it. Is that the only solution?

  Read the article

• How to checkout a case sensitive SVN source code branch to a case insensitive system?

  - by gagneet

  I am working on a Macbook system , which is formatted as a case insensitive system. The issue is that, I need to check out a SVN branch which has some case sensitive files in it. Example: inbuilt-file.c InBuilt-File.c How do I checkout this branch when both the files are in the same folder? When I try and checkout, it gives me an error stating that an unversioned file of the name already exists.

  Read the article

• Parallel Dev: Should developers work within the same branch?

  - by Zombies

  Should multiple developers work within the same branch, and update - modify - commit ? Or should each developer have his/her own each branch exclusively? And how would sharing branches impact an environment where you are doing routine maintenance as opposed to unmaintained code streams? Also, how would this work if you deploy each developers work as soon as it is done and passes testing (rapidly, as opposed to putting all of their work into a single release).

  Read the article

• How do I copy a version of a single file from one git branch to another?

  - by madlep

  I've got two branches that are fully merged together. However, after the merge is done, I realise that one file has been messed up by the merge (someone else did an auto-format, gah), and it would just be easier to change to the new version in the other branch, and then re-insert my one line change after bringing it over into my branch. So what's the easiest way in git to do this?

  Read the article

• Why do clients on Branch Sites insist on accessing SYSVOL on the HQ DC instead of the branches' RODC?

  - by pepoluan

  I'm still scratching my head over this situation... You see, we have 3 RW DCs in the HQ, and 1 RODC on every branch sites (50+ locations). During startup, a script will pull in some files from \\example.com\SYSVOL\example.com\Common\Data But we have been experiencing bandwidth overload. A traffic analysis indicated that lots of clients in the Branch Sites were trying to access the SYSVOL located in the RW DCs. E.g.: If the RW DCs are 10.1.0.15, 10.2.0.15, and 10.3.0.15, and site 'X' has a subnet of 10.27.0.0/16 (with its RODC at 10.27.0.15), clients at site 'X' seem to insist on accessing \\10.1.0.15\SYSVOL or \\10.2.0.15\SYSVOL or \\10.3.0.15\SYSVOL; they seem to be ignoring the RODC completely. What is going on here? Where should I start investigating what went wrong? BTW, I'm already using DFS-R, and replication have been going on successfully; I can put a small 'canary' file on one of the RW DCs, and within minutes all the RODCs will have successfully replicated the 'canary' file.

  Read the article

• How to prevent git merge to merge a specific file from trunk into a branch and vice versa

  - by svenn

  Hi, I am using git while developing VHDL code. I am doing development on a component in a git branch: comp_dev. The component interface does not change, just the code inside the component. Now, this component already exists in the master branch, but in a more stable version, enough for other developers to be able to use the component. The other developers also have branches for their work, and when their code is good they merge their branches back to master. At this stage I need to be able to merge all the changes from master back to my comp_dev branch, which is basically no problem, but sometimes the stable version of the component I am working on do change as a part of other designers work, but not the interface. I have to do manual git merge -s ours on that particular file every time I want to merge, otherwise I get a conflict that I need to solve manually, throwing out their work. The same happens if I want to merge changes in other files back to master. If I forget to do git merge -s ours src/rx/state_machine.vhd comp_dev before I do a git merge, then I end up with either a manual merge, or I accidentally merge an unstable version of the state machine on top of the stable one. Is there a way to temporarily exclude one file from merges?

  Read the article

• How to change the default branch to push in mercurial?

  - by timmfin

  I like creating named branches in Mercurial to deal with features that might take a while to code, so when I push I do a hg push -r default to insure I'm only pushing changes to the default branch. However, it is a pain to have to remember -r default every since time I do do a push or outgoing command. So I tried fix this by adding this config to my ~/.hgrc: [defaults] push = push -r default outgoing = outgoing -r default The problem is, those config lines are not really defaults, they are aliases. They work as intended until I try to do a hg push -r <some revision>. And the "default" I've setup just obliterates the revision I passed in. (I see that defaults are deprecated, but aliases have the same problem). I tried looking around, but I can't find anything that will allow me to set a default branch to push AND allow me to override it when necessary. Anyone know of something else I could do? ps: I do realize that I could have separate clones for each branch, but I would rather not do that. It's annoying to have to switch directories, particularly when you have shared configuration or editor workspaces.

  Read the article

• What am I doing wrong with SVN merging?

  - by randomusername

  When SVN with merge tracking works, it's really nice, I love it. But it keeps getting twisted up. We are using TortoiseSVN. We continuously get the following message: Error: Reintegrate can only be used if revisions 1234 through 2345 were previously merged from /Trunk to the reintegrate source, but this is not the case For reference, this is the method we are using: Create a Branch Develop in the branch Occasionally Merge a range of revisions from the Trunk to the Branch When branch is stable, Reintegrate a branch from the branch to the trunk Delete the branch I Merge a range of revisions from the trunk to the branch (leaving the range blank, so it should be all revisions) just prior to the reintegrate operation, so the branch should be properly synced with the trunk. Right now, the Trunk has multiple SVN merge tracking properties associated with it. Should it? Or should a Reintegrate not add any merge tracking info? Is there something wrong with our process? This is making SVN unusable - 1 out of every 3 reintegrates forces me to dive in and hack at the merge tracking info.

  Read the article

• Git branching and tagging best practices

  - by Code-Guru

  I am currently learning to use Git by reading Pro Git. Right now I'm learning about branching and tags. My question is when should I use a branch and when should I use a tag? For example, say I create a branch for version 1.1 of a project. When I finish and release this version, should I leave the branch to mark the release version? Or should I add a tag? If I add a tag, should I delete the version branch (assuming that it is merged into master or some other branch)?

  Read the article

• Why is Git telling me "Your branch is ahead of 'origin/master' by 11 commits." and how do I get it t

  - by spilth

  I'm a Git newbie. I recently moved a Rails project from Subversion to Git. I followed the tutorial here: http://www.simplisticcomplexity.com/2008/03/05/cleanly-migrate-your-subversion-repository-to-a-git-repository/ I am also using unfuddle.com to store my code. I make changes on my Mac laptop on the train to/from work and then push them to unfuddle when I have a network connection using the following command: git push unfuddle master I use Capistrano for deployments and pull code from the unfuddle repository using the master branch. Lately I've noticed the following message when I run "git status" on my laptop: # On branch master # Your branch is ahead of 'origin/master' by 11 commits. # nothing to commit (working directory clean) And I'm confused as to why. I thought my laptop was the origin... but don't know if either the fact that I originally pulled from Subversion or push to Unfuddle is what's causing the message to show up. How can I: Find out where Git thinks 'origin/master' is? If it's somewhere else, how do I turn my laptop into the 'origin/master'? Get this message to go away. It makes me think Git is unhappy about something. My mac is running Git version 1.6.0.1. When I run git remote show origin as suggested by dbr, I get the following: ~/Projects/GeekFor/geekfor 10:47 AM $ git remote show origin fatal: '/Users/brian/Projects/GeekFor/gf/.git': unable to chdir or not a git archive fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly When I run git remote -v as suggested by Aristotle Pagaltzis, I get the following: ~/Projects/GeekFor/geekfor 10:33 AM $ git remote -v origin /Users/brian/Projects/GeekFor/gf/.git unfuddle [email protected]:spilth/geekfor.git Now, interestingly, I'm working on my project in the geekfor directory but it says my origin is my local machine in the gf directory. I believe gf was the temporary directory I used when converting my project from Subversion to Git and probably where I pushed to unfuddle from. Then I believe I checked out a fresh copy from unfuddle to the geekfor directory. So it looks like I should follow dbr's advice and do: git remote rm origin git remote add origin [email protected]:spilth/geekfor.git

  Read the article

• SVN: is it possible to delete a branch that was copied removed etc for good?

  - by dimus

  I have to remove a branch from svn history for good. Normally I would use svnadmin dump /path/to/repo |svndumpfilter --drop-empty-revs --renumber-revs exclude /branches/bad_branch However this branch was not just created, but also moved and then removed and dump script fails to process downstream information with messages like: Invalid copy source path '/branches/bad_branch' So I imagine 2 ways to cope with the problem keep only last few revisions of the history and put current repository as an archive on the web make a dump up to the revision where the 'bad_branch' was created and apply the rest of the changes as a patch, therefore losing history of a few recent commits. Is there a better, cleaner way to deal with this?

  Read the article

• How to configure git repository so a branch other than master is checked out after a cloning?

  - by Suraj Barkale

  I am trying to set up a git server with bunch of repositories. I am planning to use the branching model described in http://nvie.com/git-model article. So I will have at least two branches (named master and develop) in the repository. After a clone the master branch is checked out by git. Is there a git config option so that develop branch will be checked out instead? In effect I want git clone my_repo_url to behave as git clone -b develop my_repo_url.

  Read the article

• Good overview tool / board for visualizing Subversion branch acitivity?

  - by Sam

  Our team is sometimes finding it a bit confusing and time-consuming to figure out which subversion operations have been perrformed on our different branches in Subversion. Example, when has the Development branch last been merged into the Trunk? When was this particular Tag created, based on what branch etc etc. All of this information can of course be extracted from the Subversion Log, but thats always a manual, time-consuming and error-prone process. Simplest solution seems to be a simple whiteboard with a visualization of all the different branches/tags/trunk in Subversion and people drawing on it, whenever something significant happens. But we're not averse to finding some kind of a digital solution as well, stored centrally. Obviously both systems depend on people actually maintaining the model, but you'll always more or less have that. What do you use as best practice for keeping a clear view on all Subversion operations in the current Sprint (or beyond)?

  Read the article

• Unable to access internal network through PfSense WAN port

  - by Sean

  Our branch office is unable to connect to our internal network for some reason. However we can connect to the branch office domain controller from behind PfSense. The following is our setup: |Branch DC - 192.168.0.101 | |Branch Firewall - 192.168.0.2 | |(Internet) | |Local Firewall - 192.168.3.1 | |PFSense WAN port - 192.168.3.100 |PFSense LAN port - 192.168.1.1 | | DC1 - 192.168.1.2|DC2 - 192.168.1.4 Branch DC can ping and connect to PFSense WebGUI on the WAN port successfully (we set this up using the PfSense documentation). DC1 and DC2 can connect outbound to the Branch DC. There seems to be a rule that prevents internal access on the WAN port. However our rules are set to allow all traffic on the LAN and WAN ports. It would be ideal to just disable the firewall altogether since we already have a firewall but when we do this, PfSense doesn't allow any internal traffic at all. I look forward to any assistance and thank you ahead of time.

  Read the article

• Downloading source via bazaar

  - by beanaroo

  Forgive me if this is a stupid question or an inapproptiate place to ask. This is my first time attempting to download source by means of bazaar (launchpad). Regardless of the package or branch... I always get an error like the following: bzr: ERROR: Revision {[email protected]} not present in "Graph(StackedParentsProvider(bzrlib.repository._LazyListJoin(([CachingParentsProvider(None)], []))))". I have looked all over and cannot find an answer. What does this mean? How can I resolve it? Many thanks. ---edit--- Ubuntu 12.10 running BZR-2.6.0Commands include but are not limited to: bzr branch lp:ubuntu/quantal-proposed/ubiquity bzr branch lp:ubuntu/quantal/ubiquity bzr branch lp:ubuntu/quantal/ubiquity-slideshow-ubuntu bzr branch lp:nano (just to test) bzr branch lp:ubuntu/quantal/transmission (just to test)

  Read the article

• Clarify git stash for me in switching branches

  - by EmmyS

  I've been working on branch A. My work there is not finished, but I need to switch to branch B for a while. It looks like stash is the command to use. I've found a number of references showing how to use stash to save your changes, but I'm a bit confused. All of the references say something like, when you're ready to go back, just do git stash pop. They don't, however, tell me if I need to switch back to branch A before doing that, though. So, do I manually go back to branch A before running stash pop, or do I stay in branch B, and the actual act of running stash pop will send me back to branch A where I left off with it?

  Read the article

• Integrating different branches from external sources into a single Mercurial repository

  - by dukeofgaming

  I'm currently working in a company using Perforce and am making way for distributed version control with Mercurial. I've had success importing Perforce history using the perfarce (quite a suitable name, I laugh every time I see/say it) however, this only works with a single branch at a time. Here's how my P4 integration setup works: In perforce, create a "client", which is kind of a description of what you will be constantly updating/checking-out. This can only address one branch at a time (trunk or other). Once you do this, run hg clone p4://<server>/<client_name> Go to .hg/hgrc and put the perforce path line: perforce = p4://<server>/<client_name> Work normally with the code under mercurial, do hg pull perforce to sync up, hg push to export a changelist What I'd like to be able to do is have a perforce path per branch and have everything work in the same repository. Now, pushing is not a problem, however, if I pull the history from another branch it would end up at the default branch. I'd like to be able to do something like hg pull perforce-R5 and have it land in mercurial's R5 branch. Even if I have no merging history, it would be sweet enough to be able to preserve it. There are also other plugins for CVCSs that let you integrate mercurial, but AFAIK the subversion one has the same problem. I don't think there is a straight-through way of doing this, but as long as I could automate the process with some hooks and scripts in a single Mercurial machine, that would be good enough.

  Read the article

• vector rotations for branches of a 3d tree

  - by freefallr

  I'm attempting to create a 3d tree procedurally. I'm hoping that someone can check my vector rotation maths, as I'm a bit confused. I'm using an l-system (a recursive algorithm for generating branches). The trunk of the tree is the root node. It's orientation is aligned to the y axis. In the next iteration of the tree (e.g. the first branches), I might create a branch that is oriented say by +10 degrees in the X axis and a similar amount in the Z axis, relative to the trunk. I know that I should keep a rotation matrix at each branch, so that it can be applied to child branches, along with any modifications to the child branch. My questions then: for the trunk, the rotation matrix - is that just the identity matrix * initial orientation vector ? for the first branch (and subsequent branches) - I'll "inherit" the rotation matrix of the parent branch, and apply x and z rotations to that also. e.g. using glm::normalize; using glm::rotateX; using glm::vec4; using glm::mat4; using glm::rotate; vec4 vYAxis = vec4(0.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f); vec4 vInitial = normalize( rotateX( vYAxis, 10.0f ) ); mat4 mRotation = mat4(1.0); // trunk rotation matrix = identity * initial orientation vector mRotation *= vInitial; // first branch = parent rotation matrix * this branches rotations mRotation *= rotate( 10.0f, 1.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f ); // x rotation mRotation *= rotate( 10.0f, 0.0f, 0.0f, 1.0f ); // z rotation Are my maths and approach correct, or am I completely wrong? Finally, I'm using the glm library with OpenGL / C++ for this. Is the order of x rotation and z rotation important?

  Read the article

• Releasing software/Using Continuous Integration - What do most companies seem to use?

  - by Sagar

  I've set up our continuous integration system, and it has been working for about a year now. We have finally reached a point where we want to do releases using the same. Before our CI system, the process(es) that was used was: (Develop) -> Ready for release -> Create a branch -> (Build -> Fix bugs as QA finds them) Loop -> Final build -> Tag (Develop) -> Ready for release -> (build -> fix bugs) Loop -> Tag Our CI setup: 1 server for development (DEV) 1 server for qa/release (QA) The second one has integrated into CI perfectly. I create a branch when the software is ready for release, and the branch never changes thereafter, which means the build is reproduceable without having to change the CI job. Any future development takes place on HEAD, and even maintainence releases get a completely new branch and a completely new job, which remains on the CI system forever, and then some. The first method is harder to adapt. If the branch changes, the build is not reproduceable unless I use the tag to build [jobs on the CI server uses the branch for QA/RELEASE, and HEAD for development builds]. However, if I use the tag to build, I have to create a new CI job to build from the tag (lose changelog on server), or change the existing job (lose original job configuration). I know this sounds complicated, and if required, I will rewrite/edit to explain the situation better. However, my question: [If at all] what process does your company use to release software using continuous integration systems. Is it even done using the CI system, or manually?

  Read the article

• Importing an existing project into Git

  - by Andy

  Background During the course of developing our site (ASP.NET), we discovered that our existing source control (SourceGear Vault) wasn't working for us. So, we decided to migrate to Git. The translation has been less than smooth though. Our site is broken up into three environments DEV, QA, and PROD. For tho most part, DEV and the source control repo have been in sync with each other. There is one branch in the repo, if a page was going to be moved up to QA then the file was moved manually, same thing with stuff that was ready for PROD. So, our current QA and PROD environments do not correspond to any particular commit in the master branch. Clarification: The QA and PROD branches are not currently, nor have they ever been in source control. The Question How do I move QA and PROD into Git? Should I forget about the history we've maintained up to this point and start over with a new repo? I could start with everything on PROD, then make a branch and pull in everything from QA, and then make another branch off of that with DEV. That way not only will the branches reflect the differences in the environments, they'll be in the right order chronologically with the newest commits in the DEV branch. What I've tried so far I thought about creating a QA branch off of the current master and using robocopy to make the working folder look like the current QA environment. This doesn't work because the new commit from QA will remove new files from DEV and that will remove them when we merge up, I suspect there will be similar problems if I started QA at an earlier (though not exact) commit from DEV.

  Read the article

• How can I combine code from an old revision when I didn't branch in TortoiseMerge?

  - by gr33d

  I need to combine (merge?) some parts of an old revision with a newer revision of a file. I'm still pretty new to subversion, so I'm not sure what I'll bomb in the process. I did not branch--these are simply different revisions of a file. How do I send the sections of code from r1 to r3 where they are needed. The keyboard shortcuts and menu options for "theirs", "mine", "left block", "right block", etc aren't very intuitive. If I need 5 blocks from r1 to be after the first 10 blocks of r3, how do I do it? Shouldn't I be able to go through r1 block by block and decide if and where it belongs in r3? Thanks in advance!

  Read the article

• Lost my commit in GIT. Can you accidentally delete commits?

  - by baash05

  I'm using git gui and I can't see my branch. I know I checked something in today. I changed to an earlier branch after I did my commit and verified it with the branch viewer. I made changes to the earlier branch and then wanted to go back to my current branch, but I can't see it any more. Any help would be great.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21  | Next Page >