Search Results

Search found 819 results on 33 pages for 'mercurial'.

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

Page 16/33 | < Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >

  • Importing a Mercurial repository automatically (e.g. SVN Externals)

    - by dawmail333
    I have a project that I am developing built off CodeIgniter. The main part of the project is a private system I am creating, but I want to add it to source control, to gain all the associated goodies. Now I'm using Mercurial, so I did the whole hg init bit, so I've got the repository set up. Now, one of the things I've done is to make a library for CodeIgniter, which I use in this project. Now I want to make this library open, so I need a separate repo for that. For anyone unfamiliar with CodeIgniter library development, here's a reference: application /config <- configuration files /libraries <- library logic in here Now I will probably develop a few more libraries in the course of this project, so I can't just dump a repo in the application folder without clumping them all together. What I did was this: dev/ci/library <- library here dev/project <- project here Now in both of those folders, I have made a repository. What I want to do is make the project repository automatically reference the library repository, so I can have a private and a public repository, as I explained earlier. The main way to do this, I have read, is to use subrepositories, but I can only find examples on nested ones (which are unclear anyway, I find). How do I make it reference another repository like svn:externals?

    Read the article

  • Bad idea to force creation of Mercurial remote heads (ie. branches)?

    - by Chad Johnson
    I am developing a centralized web application, and I have a centralized Mercurial repository. Locally I created a branch in my repository hg branch my_branch I then made some changes and committed. Then when I try to push, I get abort: push creates new remote branch 'my_branch'! (did you forget to merge? use push -f to force) I've just been using push -f. Is this bad? I WANT multiple branches in my central, remote repository, as I want to 1) back up my work and 2) allow other developers to develop with me on that branch. Is it bad or something to have branches in my remote repository or something? Should I not be doing push -f (and if not, what should I do?)? Why does Joel say this in his tutorial: Occasionally I've made a change in a branch, pushed, switched to another branch, and changes I had made in that branch I switch to were mysteriously reverted to a previous version from several commits ago. Maybe this is a symptom of forcing a push?

    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

  • Bitbucket and a small development house

    - by Marlon
    I am in the process of finally rolling Mercurial as our version control system at work. This is a huge deal for everyone as, shockingly, they have never used a VCS. After months of putting the bug in management's ears, they finally saw the light and now realise how much better it is than working with a network of shared folders! In the process of rolling this out, I am thinking of different strategies to manage our stuff and I am leaning towards using Bitbucket as our "central" repository. The projects in Bitbucket will solely be private projects and everyone will push and pull from there. I am open to different suggestions, but has anyone got a similar setup? If so, what caveats have you encountered?

    Read the article

  • Using branchs for a mini project or module of project: Good practice?

    - by TheLQ
    In my repo I have 3 closely related mini projects: 1 server and 2 clients. They are all quite small (<3 files each). Since they are so small and so closely related I just dropped them in folders in one single repo. However now that I know I can't clone a single directory in my VCS of choice (Mercurial), I'm considering splitting them up. However I'm confused about general best practice: Is it okay to put different small projects in different branches, or should they all go in different repos? I'm currently leaning towards branching since I can't easily splice out the file history of the different projects but then your using a feature in a way it wasn't meant to be used.

    Read the article

  • Can I migrate a clone of Google Code repository into Github?

    - by David Conde
    I want to create a clone of a Google Code repository, which I cannot download due to Country restrictions and I want to migrate that clone into Github, which I can use without any problem. The thing is I have a Github account and I can browse through GoogleCode but I cannot take my TortoiseHg and clone a repo just like that because I'm from Cuba and I get a lovely Google page saying that I cannot go into Google code. I'm guessing you know how I manage to browse :) I would like to import a mercurial repository into my Github repo, my questions: Is it possible? How can I do it?

    Read the article

  • How to organise projects with dependencies on BitBucket?

    - by Timwi
    Both Mercurial and BitBucket make one fundamental assumption: 1 repo = 1 project. If I have a project that has a dependency (a library) which is shared by many projects, this assumption gets in the way. Now it is no longer possible to have a separate BitBucket page for each project while still being able to commit atomic revisions to multiple projects. If I put all the projects into one repo, they all become one “project” on BitBucket. If I put them in separate repos, it is no longer possible to know which version of the library project was in use at revision X of a dependent project. How is this situation normally solved on BitBucket, or is there explicitly no support for this common scenario?

    Read the article

  • Using branches for a mini project or module of project: Good practice?

    - by TheLQ
    In my repo I have 3 closely related mini projects: 1 server and 2 clients. They are all quite small (<3 files each). Since they are so small and so closely related I just dropped them in folders in one single repo. However now that I know I can't clone a single directory in my VCS of choice (Mercurial), I'm considering splitting them up. However I'm confused about general best practice: Is it okay to put different small projects in different branches, or should they all go in different repos? I'm currently leaning towards branching since I can't easily splice out the file history of the different projects but then your using a feature in a way it wasn't meant to be used.

    Read the article

  • Bitbucket and a small development house

    - by Marlon
    I am in the process of finally rolling Mercurial as our version control system at work. This is a huge deal for everyone as, shockingly, they have never used a VCS. After months of putting the bug in management's ears, they finally saw the light and now realise how much better it is than working with a network of shared folders! In the process of rolling this out, I am thinking of different strategies to manage our stuff and I am leaning towards using Bitbucket as our "central" repository. The projects in Bitbucket will solely be private projects and everyone will push and pull from there. I am open to different suggestions, but has anyone got a similar setup? If so, what caveats have you encountered?

    Read the article

  • What's so difficult about SVN merges? [closed]

    - by Mason Wheeler
    Possible Duplicate: I’m a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS? Every once in a while, you hear someone saying that distributed version control (Git, HG) is inherently better than centralized version control (like SVN) because merging is difficult and painful in SVN. The thing is, I've never had any trouble with merging in SVN, and since you only ever hear that claim being made by DVCS advocates, and not by actual SVN users, it tends to remind me of those obnoxious commercials on TV where they try to sell you something you don't need by having bumbling actors pretend that the thing you already have and works just fine is incredibly difficult to use. And the use case that's invariably brought up is re-merging a branch, which again reminds me of those strawman product advertisements; if you know what you're doing, you shouldn't (and shouldn't ever have to) re-merge a branch in the first place. (Of course it's difficult to do when you're doing something fundamentally wrong and silly!) So, discounting the ridiculous strawman use case, what is there in SVN merging that is inherently more difficult than merging in a DVCS system?

    Read the article

  • Versioning millions of files with distributed SCM

    - by C. Lawrence Wenham
    I'm looking into the feasibility of using off-the-shelf distributed SCMs such as Git or Mercurial to manage millions of XML files. Each file would be a commercial transaction, such as a purchase order, that would be updated perhaps 10 times during the lifecycle of the transaction until it is "done" and changes no more. And by "manage", I mean that the SCM would be used to not just version the files, but also to replicate them to other machines for redundancy and transfer of IP. Lets suppose, for the sake of example, that a goal is to provide good performance if it was handling the volume of orders that Amazon.com claimed to have at its peak in December 2010: about 150,000 orders per minute. We're expecting the system to be distributed over many servers in order to get reasonable performance. We're also planning to use solid-state drives exclusively. There is a reason why we don't want to use an RDBMS for primary storage, but it's a bit beyond the scope of this question. Does anyone have first-hand experience with the performance of distributed SCMs under such a load, and what strategies were used? Open-source preferred, since the final product is to be FOSS, too.

    Read the article

  • Big project layout : adding new feature on multiple sub-projects

    - by Shiplu
    I want to know how to manage a big project with many components with version control management system. In my current project there are 4 major parts. Web Server Admin console Platform. The web and server part uses 2 libraries that I wrote. In total there are 5 git repositories and 1 mercurial repository. The project build script is in Platform repository. It automates the whole building process. The problem is when I add a new feature that affects multiple components I have to create branch for each of the affected repo. Implement the feature. Merge it back. My gut feeling is "something is wrong". So should I create a single repo and put all the components there? I think branching will be easier in that case. Or I just do what I am doing right now. In that case how do I solve this problem of creating branch on each repository?

    Read the article

  • How to configure basic authentication in Apache httpd virtual hosts?

    - by Jader Dias
    I'm trying to configure mercurial access using Apache http. It requires authentication. My /etc/apache2/sites-enabled/mercurial looks like this: NameVirtualHost *:8080 <VirtualHost *:8080> UseCanonicalName Off ServerAdmin webmaster@localhost AddHandler cgi-script .cgi ScriptAliasMatch ^(.*) /usr/lib/cgi-bin/hgwebdir.cgi/$1 </VirtualHost> Every tutorial I read on the internet tells me to insert these lines: AuthType Basic AuthUserFile /usr/local/etc/httpd/users But when I do it I get the following error: # /etc/init.d/apache2 reload Syntax error on line 8 of /etc/apache2/sites-enabled/mercurial: AuthType not allowed here My distro is a customized Ubuntu called Turnkey Linux Redmine

    Read the article

  • How do I compile mercurial 1.5.2 on debian?

    - by Aaron Digulla
    I downloaded the files for Mercurial 1.5.2 from http://packages.debian.org/sid/mercurial (mercurial_1.5.2-1.debian.tar.gz, mercurial_1.5.2-1.dsc and mercurial_1.5.2.orig.tar.gz). How do I get a .deb package out of these? I tried to follow the instructions at http://www.debian.org/doc/maint-guide/ch-build.en.html but they don't work. I tried to unpack the two archives and run dpkg-buildpackage or debian/rules build but that fails with: dh --with quilt clean dh_testdir debian/rules override_dh_auto_clean make[1]: Entering directory `/home/user/packages/mercurial-deb' cp -a mercurial/__version__.py mercurial/__version__.py.save cp: cannot stat `mercurial/__version__.py': No such file or directory make[1]: *** [override_dh_auto_clean] Error 1 make[1]: Leaving directory `/home/user/packages/mercurial-deb' make: *** [clean] Error 2 That's because the directory mercurial is inside mercurial_1.5.2/. Why doesn't the build script cd into the right place? If I try ../debian/rules build, I get dh --with quilt build dh: cannot read debian/control: No such file or directory sigh How do I compile a package for debian???

    Read the article

  • Python and mod_wsgi path issue

    - by jasonh
    I have an AIX 6.1 system that I've compiled and installed: Apache 2.2.21 (into /usr/local/mercurial) Python 2.7.2 (into /usr/local/bin and /usr/local/lib) mod_wsgi 3.3 (with the AIX fix #1 described here) Mercurial 2.0 (system-wide) However, when Apache starts, I get the following message in error_log: IOError: invalid Python installation: unable to open /usr/local/bin/lib/python2.7/config/Makefile (No such file or directory) See the problem? bin/lib doesn't exist. /usr/local/lib/python2.7/config/Makefile does exist though. However, I can't figure out where it's getting that path from. Here's the environment variables I've got: PYTHONHOME=/usr/local/bin PYTHONPATH=/usr/local/lib/python2.7 LIBPATH="/usr/local/mercurial/lib:$LIBPATH" PATH=/usr/local/bin:/usr/local/lib:$PATH LDR_CNTRL="MAXDATA=0x80000000" AIXTHREAD_SCOPE=S AIXTHREAD_MUTEX_DEBUG=OFF AIXTHREAD_RWLOCK_DEBUG=OFF AIXTHREAD_COND_DEBUG=OFF SPINLOOPTIME=1000 YIELDLOOPTIME=8 MALLOCMULTIHEAP=considersize,heaps:8 I've tried all sorts of combinations with and without PYTHONHOME, PYTHONLIB and PATH in envvars. My PATH, in case it matters is: /usr/bin:/etc:/usr/sbin:/usr/ucb:/usr/bin/X11:/sbin:/usr/opt/ifor/bin:/usr/local/bin:.

    Read the article

  • Mercurial: can't host on BitBucket.org with an error SSH, OpenSSH?

    - by raychenon
    For a new project, I created a new repo inside the project's folder. This is the first time I see this error. Following this guide 3.6 Share the repository http://tortoisehg.bitbucket.org/manual/1.0/quick.html In destination path : https://bitbucket.org/$myaccount/$myrepo I get this: abort: cannot create new http repository [command interrupted] In command line I do the equivalent: hg push https://bitbucket.org/$myaccount/$myrepo error SSH-2.0-OpenSSH_5.3 Previously I cloned a HG project on bitbucket.org with no problem. I changed without any results in the Global Settings Proxy Host : https://bitbucket.org/$myaccount user : password :

    Read the article

  • How do I convert a git repository to mercurial?

    - by Spoike
    I've been developing a java application using git as source code repository. I'd like to share the project with other java developers and hg seems to be most used by them. My question is how do I convert a git repository to hg? If I tried googling "convert git to hg" and every search hit is about converting from git to hg. I'm also using TortoiseHg.

    Read the article

  • How to fix an error in a Mercurial changeset comment?

    - by Sly
    Is there a way to rewrite the hg commit message if the wrong information was entered? We always include our Bug ID when we commit a changeset. For instance: hg commit -m "Bug 14585: LastName field should be mandatory" But If I put the wrong bug ID, is there a way (through an extension maybe) to fix the comment once the changeset has been committed and pushed to a central repo?

    Read the article

  • Mercurial How To Merge 2 Repositories that share a common ancestor but are not clones of the same re

    - by sylvanaar
    I am using hg-subversion, and I have 2 different hg repositories one from our svn trunk, and one from a branch of the trunk. I would like to link them somehow. At some point in the history both Hg repositories will be identical is there some way to join them? In other words is there a way to relate the repositories from within Hg? The technique I am currently using is to just export the second repository over top of the working copy of the revision they share, and then commit that working copy as a branch in Hg, but I lose the history this way. Any advice would be great

    Read the article

  • How good is my method of embedding version numbers into my application using Mercurial hooks?

    - by ArtB
    This is not quite a specifc question, and more me like for a criticism of my current approach. I would like to include the program version number in the program I am developing. This is not a commercial product, but a research application so it is important to know which version generated the results. My method works as follows: There is a "pre-commit" hook in my .hg/hgrc file link to .hg/version_gen.sh version_gen.sh consists solely of: hg parent --template "r{rev}_{date|shortdate}" > version.num In the makefile, the line version="%__VERSION__% in the main script is replaced with the content of the version.num file. Are there better ways of doing this? The only real short coming I can see is that if you only commit a specfic file, version.num will be updated, but it won't be commited, and if I tried to add always committing that file, that would result in an infite loop (unless I created some temp file to indicate I was already in a commit, but that seems ugly...).

    Read the article

facebook twitter digg google delicious technorati stumbleupon myspace wordpress linkedin gmail igoogle windows live tumblr viadeo yahoo buzz yahoo mail yahoo bookmarks favorites email print

< Previous Page | 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23  | Next Page >