Search Results

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

Page 19/70 | < Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >

  • SNMP HOSTMIB.MIB not loading?

    - by user11860
    Forgive me if the answer is something glaringly obvious but I just can't seem to get access to any OIDs under the HOST branch in SNMP. I've used an SNMP browser to inspect a few of my systems and none of them show a HOST branch under ISO.ORG.DOD.INTERNET.MGMT.MIB-2. Any thoughts as to why? I'm looking to monitor a few computer's hardware resources via SNMP and unfortuantely all such OIDs live under the missing HOST branch, Any thoughts?

    Read the article

  • How to fix this error 'cvs [checkout aborted]: no such tag r20120711' on php eclipse helios?

    - by Manu-dra-kru
    I am using php eclipse helios for debugging php code and using CVS as repositiry. Under CVS repository there are 3 - head branch version and head conatins the repository of server. Under head again I have 3 bms cvsroot news4u To create a new branch I used to click on news4u and select a option 'add to branch list'. But accidently I selected 'Tag as version' with name r20120711 and after that I have created a branch by same name. Now if check out is taken, it gets check out partially and gets failed and if tried to commit the resource, it says, 'no tag is found by that name'. How to fix this.

    Read the article

  • How to fix this error 'cvs [checkout aborted]: no such tag r20120711' on php eclipse helios?

    - by Manu-dra-kru
    I am using php eclipse helios for debugging php code and using CVS as repositiry. Under CVS repository there are 3 - head branch version and head conatins the repository of server. Under head again I have 3 bms cvsroot news4u To create a new branch I used to click on news4u and select a option 'add to branch list'. But accidently I selected 'Tag as version' with name r20120711 and after that I have created a branch by same name. Now if check out is taken, it gets check out partially and gets failed and if tried to commit the resource, it says, 'no tag is found by that name'. How to fix this.

    Read the article

  • Cross join problem query

    - by user66121
    i have following table structure HUB_DETAILS (Master) Branch_ID Branch_Name VTRCheckList (Master) CLid CLName VTRCheckListDetails (Detail) CLid Branch_ID VTRValue vtrRespDate Actually when i run the following query it does comes with all the Checklist names alongwith all branch names but shows the value in every branch infact only 1 branch has data in the given date criteria. it should show 0 if there is no data in checklist of the respective branch. SELECT VTRCheckList.CLName, Hub_Details.BranchName, sum(cast(VTRCheckListDetails.VtrValue as int)) as 'Total' FROM VTRCheckListDetails INNER JOIN VTRCheckList ON VTRCheckListDetails.CLid = VTRCheckList.CLid CROSS JOIN Hub_Details where Convert(date,VTRCheckListDetails.vtrRespDate, 105) >= convert(date,'01-01-2011',105) and Convert(date, VTRCheckListDetails.vtrRespDate, 105) <= convert(date,'30-01-2011',105) GROUP BY VTRCheckList.CLName, Hub_Details.BranchName

    Read the article

  • Understanding branching strategy/workflow correctly

    - by burnersk
    I'm using svn without branches (trunk-only) for a very long time at my workplace. I had discovered most or all of the issues related to projects which do not have any branching strategy. Unlikely this is not going to change at my workplace but for my private projects. For my private projects which most includes coworkers and working together at the same time on different features I like to have an robust branching strategy with supports long-term releases powered by git. I find out that the Atlassian Toolchain (JIRA, Stash and Bamboo) helped me most and it also recommending me an branching strategy which I like to verify for the team needs. The branching strategy was taken directly from Atlassian Stash recommendation with a small modification to the hotfix branch tree. All hotfixes should also merged into mainline. The branching strategy in words mainline (also known as master with git or trunk with svn) contains the "state of the art" developing release. Everything here was successfully checked with various automated tests (through Bamboo) and looks like everything is working. It is not proven as working because of possible missing tests. It is ready to use but not recommended for production. feature covers all new features which are not completely finished. Once a feature is finished it will be merged into mainline. Sample branch: feature/ISSUE-2-A-nice-Feature bugfix fixes non-critical bugs which can wait for the next normal release. Sample branch: bugfix/ISSUE-1-Some-typos production owns the latest release. hotfix fixes critical bugs which have to be release urgent to mainline, production and all affected long-term *release*es. Sample branch: hotfix/ISSUE-3-Check-your-math release is for long-term maintenance. Sample branches: release/1.0, release/1.1 release/1.0-rc1 I am not an expert so please provide me feedback. Which problems might appear? Which parts are missing or slowing down the productivity?

    Read the article

  • Combined Likelihood Models

    - by Lukas Vermeer
    In a series of posts on this blog we have already described a flexible approach to recording events, a technique to create analytical models for reporting, a method that uses the same principles to generate extremely powerful facet based predictions and a waterfall strategy that can be used to blend multiple (possibly facet based) models for increased accuracy. This latest, and also last, addition to this sequence of increasing modeling complexity will illustrate an advanced approach to amalgamate models, taking us to a whole new level of predictive modeling and analytical insights; combination models predicting likelihoods using multiple child models. The method described here is far from trivial. We therefore would not recommend you apply these techniques in an initial implementation of Oracle Real-Time Decisions. In most cases, basic RTD models or the approaches described before will provide more than enough predictive accuracy and analytical insight. The following is intended as an example of how more advanced models could be constructed if implementation results warrant the increased implementation and design effort. Keep implemented statistics simple! Combining likelihoods Because facet based predictions are based on metadata attributes of the choices selected, it is possible to generate such predictions for more than one attribute of a choice. We can predict the likelihood of acceptance for a particular product based on the product category (e.g. ‘toys’), as well as based on the color of the product (e.g. ‘pink’). Of course, these two predictions may be completely different (the customer may well prefer toys, but dislike pink products) and we will have to somehow combine these two separate predictions to determine an overall likelihood of acceptance for the choice. Perhaps the simplest way to combine multiple predicted likelihoods into one is to calculate the average (or perhaps maximum or minimum) likelihood. However, this would completely forgo the fact that some facets may have a far more pronounced effect on the overall likelihood than others (e.g. customers may consider the product category more important than its color). We could opt for calculating some sort of weighted average, but this would require us to specify up front the relative importance of the different facets involved. This approach would also be unresponsive to changing consumer behavior in these preferences (e.g. product price bracket may become more important to consumers as a result of economic shifts). Preferably, we would want Oracle Real-Time Decisions to learn, act upon and tell us about, the correlations between the different facet models and the overall likelihood of acceptance. This additional level of predictive modeling, where a single supermodel (no pun intended) combines the output of several (facet based) models into a single prediction, is what we call a combined likelihood model. Facet Based Scores As an example, we have implemented three different facet based models (as described earlier) in a simple RTD inline service. These models will allow us to generate predictions for likelihood of acceptance for each product based on three different metadata fields: Category, Price Bracket and Product Color. We will use an Analytical Scores entity to store these different scores so we can easily pass them between different functions. A simple function, creatively named Compute Analytical Scores, will compute for each choice the different facet scores and return an Analytical Scores entity that is stored on the choice itself. For each score, a choice attribute referring to this entity is also added to be returned to the client to facilitate testing. One Offer To Predict Them All In order to combine the different facet based predictions into one single likelihood for each product, we will need a supermodel which can predict the likelihood of acceptance, based on the outcomes of the facet models. This model will not need to consider any of the attributes of the session, because they are already represented in the outcomes of the underlying facet models. For the same reason, the supermodel will not need to learn separately for each product, because the specific combination of facets for this product are also already represented in the output of the underlying models. In other words, instead of learning how session attributes influence acceptance of a particular product, we will learn how the outcomes of facet based models for a particular product influence acceptance at a higher level. We will therefore be using a single All Offers choice to represent all offers in our combined likelihood predictions. This choice has no attribute values configured, no scores and not a single eligibility rule; nor is it ever intended to be returned to a client. The All Offers choice is to be used exclusively by the Combined Likelihood Acceptance model to predict the likelihood of acceptance for all choices; based solely on the output of the facet based models defined earlier. The Switcheroo In Oracle Real-Time Decisions, models can only learn based on attributes stored on the session. Therefore, just before generating a combined prediction for a given choice, we will temporarily copy the facet based scores—stored on the choice earlier as an Analytical Scores entity—to the session. The code for the Predict Combined Likelihood Event function is outlined below. // set session attribute to contain facet based scores. // (this is the only input for the combined model) session().setAnalyticalScores(choice.getAnalyticalScores); // predict likelihood of acceptance for All Offers choice. CombinedLikelihoodChoice c = CombinedLikelihood.getChoice("AllOffers"); Double la = CombinedLikelihoodAcceptance.getChoiceEventLikelihoods(c, "Accepted"); // clear session attribute of facet based scores. session().setAnalyticalScores(null); // return likelihood. return la; This sleight of hand will allow the Combined Likelihood Acceptance model to predict the likelihood of acceptance for the All Offers choice using these choice specific scores. After the prediction is made, we will clear the Analytical Scores session attribute to ensure it does not pollute any of the other (facet) models. To guarantee our combined likelihood model will learn based on the facet based scores—and is not distracted by the other session attributes—we will configure the model to exclude any other inputs, save for the instance of the Analytical Scores session attribute, on the model attributes tab. Recording Events In order for the combined likelihood model to learn correctly, we must ensure that the Analytical Scores session attribute is set correctly at the moment RTD records any events related to a particular choice. We apply essentially the same switching technique as before in a Record Combined Likelihood Event function. // set session attribute to contain facet based scores // (this is the only input for the combined model). session().setAnalyticalScores(choice.getAnalyticalScores); // record input event against All Offers choice. CombinedLikelihood.getChoice("AllOffers").recordEvent(event); // force learn at this moment using the Internal Dock entry point. Application.getPredictor().learn(InternalLearn.modelArray, session(), session(), Application.currentTimeMillis()); // clear session attribute of facet based scores. session().setAnalyticalScores(null); In this example, Internal Learn is a special informant configured as the learn location for the combined likelihood model. The informant itself has no particular configuration and does nothing in itself; it is used only to force the model to learn at the exact instant we have set the Analytical Scores session attribute to the correct values. Reporting Results After running a few thousand (artificially skewed) simulated sessions on our ILS, the Decision Center reporting shows some interesting results. In this case, these results reflect perfectly the bias we ourselves had introduced in our tests. In practice, we would obviously use a wider range of customer attributes and expect to see some more unexpected outcomes. The facetted model for categories has clearly picked up on the that fact our simulated youngsters have little interest in purchasing the one red-hot vehicle our ILS had on offer. Also, it would seem that customer age is an excellent predictor for the acceptance of pink products. Looking at the key drivers for the All Offers choice we can see the relative importance of the different facets to the prediction of overall likelihood. The comparative importance of the category facet for overall prediction might, in part, be explained by the clear preference of younger customers for toys over other product types; as evident from the report on the predictiveness of customer age for offer category acceptance. Conclusion Oracle Real-Time Decisions' flexible decisioning framework allows for the construction of exceptionally elaborate prediction models that facilitate powerful targeting, but nonetheless provide insightful reporting. Although few customers will have a direct need for such a sophisticated solution architecture, it is encouraging to see that this lies within the realm of the possible with RTD; and this with limited configuration and customization required. There are obviously numerous other ways in which the predictive and reporting capabilities of Oracle Real-Time Decisions can be expanded upon to tailor to individual customers needs. We will not be able to elaborate on them all on this blog; and finding the right approach for any given problem is often more difficult than implementing the solution. Nevertheless, we hope that these last few posts have given you enough of an understanding of the power of the RTD framework and its models; so that you can take some of these ideas and improve upon your own strategy. As always, if you have any questions about the above—or any Oracle Real-Time Decisions design challenges you might face—please do not hesitate to contact us; via the comments below, social media or directly at Oracle. We are completely multi-channel and would be more than glad to help. :-)

    Read the article

  • Finish feature reverted commits from develop

    - by marco-fiset
    I am using git as a version control system, and using git-flow as the branching model. I started a feature branch some weeks ago in order to maintain the system in a clean state while developping that feature. The main development continued on the develop branch, and changes from develop were merged periodically into the feature, to keep it up to date as much as possible. However came the time where the feature was finished, and I used git-flow's finish feature to merge the feature back into develop. The merge was successfully done, but then I found out that some of the commits I made in develop were reverted by the merge commit! Nowhere in develop or in the feature branch were these changes reverted, I can't see any commit that overwrote them. I just can't find anything. The only theory I have for the moment is that git is failing on me, but that would be extremely unlikely. Maybe I did some kind of wrong manipulation that made this situation come true? I can trace back in the history when the commit was made. I can see that the changes from that commit were reverted by the merge commit. Nowhere in the branch I see a commit that reverts those changes. Yet they were reverted. How is this even possible?

    Read the article

  • git for personal (one-man) projects. Overkill?

    - by Anto
    I know, and use, two version control systems: Subversion and git. Subversion, as of now, gets used for personal projects where I am the only developer and git gets used for open source projects and projects where I believe others will also work on the project. This is mostly because of git's amazing forking and merging capabilities, where everyone may work on their own branch; very handy. Now, I use Subversion for personal projects, as I think git makes little sense there. It seems to be a little bit of overkill. It is OK for me if it is centralized (on my home server, usually) when I am the only developer; I take regular backups anyway. I don't need the ability to make my own branch, the main branch is my branch. Yes, SVN has simple support for branching, but much more powerful support for it makes no sense, I think. Merging can be a pain with it, or at least from my little experience. Is there any good reason for me to use git on personal projects, or is it just simply overkill?

    Read the article

  • Understanding and memorizing git rebase parameters

    - by Robert Dailey
    So far the most confusing portion of git is rebasing onto another branch. Specifically, it's the command line arguments that are confusing. Each time I want to rebase a small piece of one branch onto the tip of another, I have to review the git rebase documentation and it takes me about 5-10 minutes to understand what each of the 3 main arguments should be. git rebase <upstream> <branch> --onto <newbase> What is a good rule of thumb to help me memorize what each of these 3 parameters should be set to, given any kind of rebase onto another branch? Bear in mind I have gone over the git-rebase documentation again, and again, and again, and again (and again), but it's always difficult to understand (like a boring scientific white-paper or something). So at this point I feel I need to involve other people to help me grasp it. My goal is that I should never have to review the documentation for these basic parameters. I haven't been able to memorize them so far, and I've done a ton of rebases already. So it's a bit unusual that I've been able to memorize every other command and its parameters so far, but not rebase with --onto.

    Read the article

  • .Net Entity Framework SaveChanges is adding without add method

    - by tmfkmoney
    I'm new to the entity framework and I'm really confused about how savechanges works. There's probably a lot of code in my example which could be improved, but here's the problem I'm having. The user enters a bunch of picks. I make sure the user hasn't already entered those picks. Then I add the picks to the database. var db = new myModel() var predictionArray = ticker.Substring(1).Split(','); // Get rid of the initial comma. var user = Membership.GetUser(); var userId = Convert.ToInt32(user.ProviderUserKey); // Get the member with all his predictions for today. var memberQuery = (from member in db.Members where member.user_id == userId select new { member, predictions = from p in member.Predictions where p.start_date == null select p }).First(); // Load all the company ids. foreach (var prediction in memberQuery.predictions) { prediction.CompanyReference.Load(); } var picks = from prediction in predictionArray let data = prediction.Split(':') let companyTicker = data[0] where !(from i in memberQuery.predictions select i.Company.ticker).Contains(companyTicker) select new Prediction { Member = memberQuery.member, Company = db.Companies.Where(c => c.ticker == companyTicker).First(), is_up = data[1] == "up", // This turns up and down into true and false. }; // Save the records to the database. // HERE'S THE PART I DON'T UNDERSTAND. // This saves the records, even though I don't have db.AddToPredictions(pick) foreach (var pick in picks) { db.SaveChanges(); } // This does not save records when the db.SaveChanges outside of a loop of picks. db.SaveChanges(); foreach (var pick in picks) { } // This saves records, but it will insert all the picks exactly once no matter how many picks you have. //The fact you're skipping a pick makes no difference in what gets inserted. var counter = 1; foreach (var pick in picks) { if (counter == 2) { db.SaveChanges(); } counter++; } There's obviously something going on with the context I don't understand. I'm guessing I've somehow loaded my new picks as pending changes, but even if that's true I don't understand I have to loop over them to save changes. Can someone explain this to me?

    Read the article

  • Guidance: How to layout you files for an Ideal Solution

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    Creating a solution and having it maintainable over time is an art and not a science. I like being pedantic and having a place for everything, no matter how small. For setting up the Areas to run Multiple projects under one solution see my post on  When should I use Areas in TFS instead of Team Projects and for an explanation of branching see Guidance: A Branching strategy for Scrum Teams. Update 17th May 2010 – We are currently trialling running a single Sprint branch to improve our history. Whenever I setup a new Team Project I implement the basic version control structure. I put “readme.txt” files in the folder structure explaining the different levels, and a solution file called “[Client].[Product].sln” located at “$/[Client]/[Product]/DEV/Main” within version control. Developers should add any projects you need to create to that solution in the format “[Client].[Product].[ProductArea].[Assembly]” and they will automatically be picked up and built automatically when you setup Automated Builds using Team Foundation Build. All test projects need to be done using MSTest to get proper IDE and Team Foundation Build integration out-of-the-box and be named for the assembly that it is testing with a naming convention of “[Client].[Product].[ProductArea].[Assembly].Tests” Here is a description of the folder layout; this content should be replicated in readme files under version control in the relevant locations so that even developers new to the project can see how to do it. Figure: The Team Project level - at this level there should be a folder for each the products that you are building if you are using Areas correctly in TFS 2010. You should try very hard to avoided spaces as these things always end up in a URL eventually e.g. "Code Auditor" should be "CodeAuditor". Figure: Product Level - At this level there should be only 3 folders (DEV, RELESE and SAFE) all of which should be in capitals. These folders represent the three stages of your application production line. Each of them may contain multiple branches but this format leaves all of your branches at the same level. Figure: The DEV folder is where all of the Development branches reside. The DEV folder will contain the "Main" branch and all feature branches is they are being used. The DEV designation specifies that all code in every branch under this folder has not been released or made ready for release. And feature branches MUST merge (Forward Integrate) from Main and stabilise prior to merging (Reverse Integration) back down into Main and being decommissioned. Figure: In the Feature branching scenario only merges are allowed onto Main, no development can be done there. Once we have a mature product it is important that new features being developed in parallel are kept separate. This would most likely be used if we had more than one Scrum team working on a single product. Figure: when we are ready to do a release of our software we will create a release branch that is then stabilised prior to deployment. This protects the serviceability of of our released code allowing developers to fix bugs and re-release an existing version. Figure: All bugs found on a release are fixed on the release.  All bugs found in a release are fixed on the release and a new deployment is created. After the deployment is created the bug fixes are then merged (Reverse Integration) into the Main branch. We do this so that we separate out our development from our production ready code.  Figure: SAFE or RTM is a read only record of what you actually released. Labels are not immutable so are useless in this circumstance.  When we have completed stabilisation of the release branch and we are ready to deploy to production we create a read-only copy of the code for reference. In some cases this could be a regulatory concern, but in most cases it protects the company building the product from legal entanglements based on what you did or did not release. Figure: This allows us to reference any particular version of our application that was ever shipped.   In addition I am an advocate of having a single solution with all the Project folders directly under the “Trunk”/”Main” folder and using the full name for the project folders.. Figure: The ideal solution If you must have multiple solutions, because you need to use more than one version of Visual Studio, name the solutions “[Client].[Product][VSVersion].sln” and have it reside in the same folder as the other solution. This makes it easier for Automated build and improves the discoverability of your code and its dependencies. Send me your feedback!   Technorati Tags: VS ALM,VSTS Developing,VS 2010,VS 2008,TFS 2010,TFS 2008,TFBS

    Read the article

  • Adding Bzr Launchpad PPA to Ubuntu Hardy

    - by Robery Stackhouse
    I've got TortoiseBazaar installed on my Windows laptop, and I was trying to branch a repository hosted on my VPS to another directory on my VPS, and I got this lovely error: bzr: ERROR: Unknown branch format: 'Bazaar Branch Format 7 (needs bzr 1.6) That lead me to this mailing-list archive: http://osdir.com/ml/bazaar/2009-06/msg00692.html Then I tried following the instructions here to add the Launchpad PPA to /etc/apt/sources.list, but they forgot to mention that you need to do this: sudo apt-key adv --recv-keys --keyserver keyserver.ubuntu.com D702BF6B8C6C1EFD Which I found out about here after I got this error: GPG error: http://ppa.launchpad.net hardy Release: The following signatures couldn't be verified because the public key is not available: NO_PUBKEY D702BF6B8C6C1EFD after modifying my /etc/apt/sources.list and running: sudo apt-get update Just thought I'd save someone else some pain. And of course, don't forget to uninstall the version of bzr that wouldn't play ball in the first place.

    Read the article

  • Github Workflow: Pushing small fix branches to remote, or keep them local?

    - by Isaac Hodes
    In Scott Chacon's workflow (explained eg in this SO answer), with essentially two silos (development, and master), if, say I have a small bug to fix (e.g. can be fixed with a few characters) is the optimal way of doing that: a) branch off of development a branch called e.g. fix_123. Push this branch to origin as I work on it. When it's done, code-reviewed, whatever, merge into development and push development to origin. b) Same as above, but without pushing fix_123 to origin.

    Read the article

  • Does using structure data semantic LocalBusiness schema markup work for local EMD URL's?

    - by ElHaix
    Based on what I have read about Google's recent Panda and Penguin updates, I'm getting the impression that using semantic markup may help improve SEO results. On a EMD (exact match domain) site, that may have been hit, we list location-based products. We are now going to be adding a itemtype="http://schema.org/Product" to each product, with relevant details. However, that product may be available in Los Angeles and also in appear in a Seattle results page. We could add a LocalBusiness item type on each geo page to define the geo location for that page. While the definition states: A particular physical business or branch of an organization. Examples of LocalBusiness include a restaurant, a particular branch of a restaurant chain, a branch of a bank, a medical practice, a club, a bowling alley, etc. We could add use the location property which would simply include the city/state details. I realize that this looks like it is meant for a physical location, however could this be done without seeming black-hat?

    Read the article

  • Code review process when using GIT as a repository?

    - by Sid
    What is the best process for code review when using GIT? Current process: We have a GIT server with a master branch to which everyone commits Devs work off the local master mirror or a local feature branch Devs commit to server's master branch Devs request code review on last commit Problem: Any bug in code review are already in master by the time it's caught. Worse, usually someone has burnt a few hours trying to figure out what happened... So, we would like To do code review BEFORE delivery into the 'master'. Have a process that works with a global team (no over the shoulder reviews!) something that doesn't require an individual dev to be at his desk/machine to be powered up so someone else can remote in (remove human dependency, devs go home at different timezones) We use TortoiseGIT for a visual representation of a list of files changed, diff'ing files etc. Some of us drop into a GIT shell when the GUI isn't enough, but ideally we'd like the workflow to be simple and GUI based (I want the tool to lift any burden, not my devs).

    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

  • git pull not working

    - by dorelal
    I am not using github. We have git setup on our machine. I created a branch from master called experiment. However when I am trying to do git pull I am getting following message. > git pull You asked me to pull without telling me which branch you want to merge with, and 'branch.experiment.merge' in your configuration file does not tell me either. Please specify which branch you want to merge on the command line and try again (e.g. 'git pull <repository> <refspec>'). See git-pull(1) for details. Here is result of git remote show origin > git remote show origin * remote origin Fetch URL: ssh://git.domain.com/var/git/app.git Push URL: ssh://git.domain.com/var/git/app.git HEAD branch: master Remote branches: experiment tracked master tracked Local branches configured for 'git pull': master merges with remote master Local refs configured for 'git push': experiment pushes to experiment (local out of date) master pushes to master (up to date) As I read the message above experiment is mapped to origin/experiment. And my local repository knows that it is out of date. Then why I am not able to do git pull?

    Read the article

  • Question about 'git branching'

    - by michael
    Hi, I read this about git branch: http://book.git-scm.com/3_basic_branching_and_merging.html so I follow it and create 1 branch : experimental And I 1. switch to experimental branch (git checkout experimental) 2. make a bunch of changes 3. commit it (git commit -a) 4. switch to master branch (git checkout master) 5. make some changes and commit there 6. switch back to experimental (git checkout experimental) 7. merge master change to experimental (git merge master) 8. there are some conflicts but after I resolve them, I did 'git add myfile' And now i am stuck, I can't move back to master when I do $ git checkout master error: Entry 'res/layout/my_item.xml' would be overwritten by merge. Cannot merge. and I did: $ git rebase --abort No rebase in progress? and I did : $ git add res/layout/socialhub_list_item.xml $ git checkout master error: Entry 'res/layout/my_item.xml' would be overwritten by merge. Cannot merge. What can I do so that I can go back to my master branch? Thank you.

    Read the article

  • TFS CM resource recommendations / some questions

    - by John
    I am working with a small development shop that consists of a group of 5 developers and 1 QA person. We are using TFS and need to get more sophisticated on how we use this tool. Currently the development team checks in their code each evening. A nightly build runs and pushes the output out on a network share. Our QA person uses this build for testing the next day. Sometimes the build off the trunk codebase has issues/bugs that hinder the QA process, and it hasn’t been a giant issue in the past, but we now want to get to a state where we have our QA person testing on a stable QA build. So I believe we need to create a branch (call it QA), and the developers will continue to develop off the trunk, but the QA person will use builds created from code in the QA branch. Seems simple enough, but we have started doing code reviews as well. So we have another desire in that only code that has been code reviewed can be promoted to the QA branch. Each developer works off a TFS item, and when they check in a changeset, they do it against a TFS item which creates a link between a checked in code file and a TFS item. Eventually the TFS item becomes complete and ready for code review. All code attached to the TFS item is reviewed. How can the versions of these files get promoted to the QA branch? In the QA branch, if a bug is found, we want to fix it in the QA branch and have the changes migrated back to the trunk. I believe TFS has a way to automatically do this doesn’t it? Long story short, we want to get to a build and CM environment that I believe is pretty standard, but we are unaware of how to make this happen with TFS. Given our situation above, can someone point out a book or website(s) that would address our specific needs? We would like to make this happen without having to get too deep in CM theory or TFS. I very much appreciate any and all suggestions! Thanks, John

    Read the article

  • Git: hide commit messages on remote repo

    - by Sebastian Bechtel
    Hi, I don't know how to bring my problem on the point so I try to explain it a bit ;-) When working with git on my local maschine I usually commit a lot. For this I use topic branches. Then I merge such a topic branch into a branch called develop which will be pushed to a remote repo. I always merge with --no-ff so their is always a commit for my whole topic. Now I'd like to only push this commit with a specified description what I did on the whole in this branch. I would prefer this because you can look at the commit history on the server and see directly what happend and don't need to read every single commit. And for my local work I would have the full history if I want to reset my branch or something similar. I don't know if their is a way to do this in git but it would be very useful for me so I give it a try to ask you ;-) Best regards, Sebastian

    Read the article

  • github like workflow on private server over ssh

    - by Jesse
    I have an server (available via ssh) on the internet that my friend and I use for working on projects together. We have started using git for source control. Our setup currently is as follows: Friend created repository on server with git init named project.friend.git I cloned project.friend.git on server to project.jesse.git I then cloned project.jesse.git on server to my local machine using git clone jesse@server:/git_repos/project.jesse.git I work on my local machine and commit to the local machine. When I want to push my changes to the project.jesse.git on server I use git push origin master. My friend is working on project.friend.git. When I want to get his changes I do pull jesse@server:/git_repos/project.friend.git. Everything seems to be working fine, however, I am now getting the following error when I do git push origin master: localpc:project.jesse jesse$ git push origin master Counting objects: 100, done. Delta compression using up to 2 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (76/76), done. Writing objects: 100% (76/76), 15.98 KiB, done. Total 76 (delta 50), reused 0 (delta 0) warning: updating the current branch warning: Updating the currently checked out branch may cause confusion, warning: as the index and work tree do not reflect changes that are in HEAD. warning: As a result, you may see the changes you just pushed into it warning: reverted when you run 'git diff' over there, and you may want warning: to run 'git reset --hard' before starting to work to recover. warning: warning: You can set 'receive.denyCurrentBranch' configuration variable to warning: 'refuse' in the remote repository to forbid pushing into its warning: current branch. warning: To allow pushing into the current branch, you can set it to 'ignore'; warning: but this is not recommended unless you arranged to update its work warning: tree to match what you pushed in some other way. warning: warning: To squelch this message, you can set it to 'warn'. warning: warning: Note that the default will change in a future version of git warning: to refuse updating the current branch unless you have the warning: configuration variable set to either 'ignore' or 'warn'. To jesse@server:/git_repos/project.jesse.git c455cb7..e9ec677 master -> master Is this warning anything I need to be worried about? Like I said, everything seems to be working. My friend is able to pull my changes in from my branch. I have the clone on the server so he can access it since he does not have access to my local machine. Is there something that could be done better? Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Git merge of same and externally modified file

    - by neduma
    I have inherited some code (from zip file) from a developer and git initialzed, made changes and set of check-ins progressively. Now, the same developer released the same code with his changes and gave me the another zip file. How do i merge my changes which i have it my git repo and his recent changes from the second zip file contents? Ideally, i would like to have the code which should be accumalation of both my changes and the developer recent changes. I tried to create branch b1 from my master branch and applied second zip file contents on top of that. committed those files in the branch and did 'git checkout master; git merge b1' - but, i do not get my changes, only his changes in my master branch.

    Read the article

  • Git How do I Push a project, that was Downloaded from Source

    - by JZ
    I worked with a graphic designer that did not clone from my github account. He downloaded the project from source rather than using the command "git clone". Since he pulled his files, a month has gone by and I want to do the following tasks: Create a new branch Push the graphic designers project into that branch Merge his branch with Master I've tried the following the github forking guide with not much luck; when I attempt to push the files into a new branch I get an error: fatal: Not a git repository (or any of the parent directories): .git How do I do this?

    Read the article

  • EXTEND_MODEL_CASES SQL 2005 workaround

    - by user282382
    Hi, I have a time series based mining model in SQL 2005 Analysis Serveries. I understand in 2008 you can do what if analysis by using EXTEND_MODEL_CASES with a Natural Prediction Join. I'm looking for a workaround or some method of doing the same thing but with 2005. My time series has 3 inputs, and one predict_only. I'd like to use the prediction function to see what types of prediction it makes for 6-12 time intervals in the future with inputs in a separate table. Is there any way to do this or something similar? Thanks

    Read the article

  • Linq join with an inner collection

    - by bronze
    Hi, I am trying a LINQ to Object query on 2 collections Customer.Orders Branches.Pending.Orders (Collection within a collection) I want to output each branch which is yet to deliver any order of the customer. var match = from order in customer.Orders join branch in Branches on order equals branch.Pending.Orders select branch; This does not work, I get : The type of one of the expressions in the join clause is incorrect. Type inference failed in the call to 'GroupJoin'. From my search, I think this is because Order or collection of Orders does not implement equals. If this query worked, it will still be wrong, as it will return a branch if the customer's and pending orders match exactly. I want a result if any of the order matches. I am learning Linq, and looking for a approach to address such issues, rather than the solution itself. I would have done this in SQL like this; SELECT b.branch_name from Customers c, Branches b, Orders o WHERE c.customer_id = o.customer_id AND o.branch_id = b.branch_id AND c.customer_id = 'my customer' AND o.order_status = 'pending'

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26  | Next Page >