Search Results

Search found 3484 results on 140 pages for 'vendor branch'.

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 2/140 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • git: programmatically know by how much the branch is ahead/behind a remote branch

    - by Olivier
    I would like to extract the information that is printed after a github status, which looks like: # On branch master # Your branch is ahead of 'origin/master' by 2 commits. Of course I can parse the output of git status but this is not recommended since this human readable output is liable to change. There are two problems: How to know the remote tracked branch? It is often origin/branch but need not be. How to get the numbers? How to know whether it is ahead/behind? By how many commits? And what about the diverged branch case?

    Read the article

  • change USB vendor id / product id

    - by Hugh Allen
    Under Windows, is there any easy way to change or forge the vendor and product id of a USB device? Say for example there's a useful program which expects a particular (but ubiquitous and generic) device but you think it will probably work with the device that you actually have. I've done lots of Googling and apparently you can do it under Linux so it occurs to me to run Windows in a VM under Linux, but that would be a bit inconvenient.

    Read the article

  • Advice Needed: Developers blocked by waiting on code to merge from another branch using GitFlow

    - by fogwolf
    Our team just made the switch from FogBugz & Kiln/Mercurial to Jira & Stash/Git. We are using the Git Flow model for branching, adding subtask branches off of feature branches (relating to Jira subtasks of Jira features). We are using Stash to assign a reviewer when we create a pull request to merge back into the parent branch (usually develop but for subtasks back into the feature branch). The problem we're finding is that even with the best planning and breakdown of feature cases, when multiple developers are working together on the same feature, say on the front-end and back-end, if they are working on interdependent code that is in separate branches one developer ends up blocking the other. We've tried pulling between each others' branches as we develop. We've also tried creating local integration branches each developer can pull from multiple branches to test the integration as they develop. Finally, and this seems to work possibly the best for us so far, though with a bit more overhead, we have tried creating an integration branch off of the feature branch right off the bat. When a subtask branch (off of the feature branch) is ready for a pull request and code review, we also manually merge those change sets into this feature integration branch. Then all interested developers are able to pull from that integration branch into other dependent subtask branches. This prevents anyone from waiting for any branch they are dependent upon to pass code review. I know this isn't necessarily a Git issue - it has to do with working on interdependent code in multiple branches, mixed with our own work process and culture. If we didn't have the strict code-review policy for develop (true integration branch) then developer 1 could merge to develop for developer 2 to pull from. Another complication is that we are also required to do some preliminary testing as part of the code review process before handing the feature off to QA.This means that even if front-end developer 1 is pulling directly from back-end developer 2's branch as they go, if back-end developer 2 finishes and his/her pull request is sitting in code review for a week, then front-end developer 2 technically can't create his pull request/code review because his/her code reviewer can't test because back-end developer 2's code hasn't been merged into develop yet. Bottom line is we're finding ourselves in a much more serial rather than parallel approach in these instance, depending on which route we go, and would like to find a process to use to avoid this. Last thing I'll mention is we realize by sharing code across branches that haven't been code reviewed and finalized yet we are in essence using the beta code of others. To a certain extent I don't think we can avoid that and are willing to accept that to a degree. Anyway, any ideas, input, etc... greatly appreciated. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • Routinely sync a branch to master using git rebase

    - by m1755
    I have a Git repository with a branch that hardly ever changes (nobody else is contributing to it). It is basically the master branch with some code and files stripped out. Having this branch around makes it easy for me to package up a leaner version of my project without having to strip out the code and files manually every time. I have been using git rebase to keep this branch up to date with the master but I always get this warning when I try to push the branch after rebasing: To prevent you from losing history, non-fast-forward updates were rejected Merge the remote changes before pushing again. See the 'Note about fast-forwards' section of 'git push --help' for details. I then use git push --force and it works but I feel like this is probably bad practice. I want to keep this branch "in sync" with the master quickly and easily. Is there a better way of handling this task?

    Read the article

  • git: rename remote branch

    - by Albert
    I have the branch master which tracks the remote branch origin/master. I want to rename them to "master-old" both locally and remote. Is that possible? For other users who tracked origin/master (and who updated their local master branch always just via 'git pull'), what whould happen after I renamed the renamed the remote branch. Would their 'git pull' still work or would it throw an error that it coudln't find origin/master anymore? Then, further on, I want to create a new master branch (both locally and remote). Again, after I did this, what would happen now if the other users do the 'git pull' now? I guess all this would result in a lot of trouble. Is there a clean way to get what I want? Or should I just leave master as it is and create a new branch master-new and just work there further on?

    Read the article

  • GitHub - commit local changes in local branch to remote branch

    - by user62046
    I use Git Shell in Windows 7, working in a branch named Save-Rotation. Then I used git push origin Save-Rotation to commit the changes to remote. The result is posted at the end. It seems good. But when I went to my repository in GitHub site, which is https://github.com/chiapas/sumatrapdf/tree/Save-Rotation I can't see any change in the repository tree or commit tree. How can I know if the commit (to remote) is successful, and why the repository page is not updated? Here is the result in command-line C:\Users\imo\Documents\GitHub\sumatrapdf [Save-Rotation]> git push origin Save-R otation Counting objects: 167, done. Delta compression using up to 8 threads. Compressing objects: 100% (18/18), done. Writing objects: 100% (119/119), 27.43 KiB, done. Total 119 (delta 101), reused 119 (delta 101) To https://github.com/chiapas/sumatrapdf * [new branch] Save-Rotation -> Save-Rotation C:\Users\imo\Documents\GitHub\sumatrapdf [Save-Rotation +2 ~17 -0 !]> git push o rigin Save-Rotation Everything up-to-date C:\Users\imo\Documents\GitHub\sumatrapdf [Save-Rotation +2 ~17 -0 !]>

    Read the article

  • Server vendor that allows 3rd party disks

    - by Alvin S
    As noted here, Dell is no longer allowing 3rd party disks to be used with their latest servers. As in, they don't work period. Which means that if you buy one of these boxes and want to upgrade the storage later, you have buy disks from Dell at significant premiums. Dell has just given me a very strong reason to take my server business elsewhere. My company buys (instead of leasing) our servers, and typically uses them for 5 years. I need to be able to upgrade/repurpose storage periodically, and do not want to be locked in to whatever Dell might have in stock, at inflated prices to boot. As you will see in the comments of the above link, it seems HP is doing the same thing. I am looking for a server vendor that offers 3-5 year warranty with same day/next day onsite service, and allows me to use 3rd party disks. Suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Git: Can I commit my working directory to a new branch without commiting it to a current branch?

    - by Noli
    Somewhat new at Git.. I am working on a project, and had all of my tests passing on the master branch. I then made some changes, and when everything started failing, I realized that maybe I should have made those changes in a different branch. Is there I way I can commit the changes to a new branch without commiting them to my master branch, so that the master still has my passing tests?

    Read the article

  • How to merge an improperly created "branch" that isn't really a branch (wasn't created by an svn cop

    - by MatrixFrog
    I'm working on a team with lots of people who are pretty unfamiliar with the concepts of version control systems, and are just kind of doing whatever seems to work, by trial and error. Someone created a "branch" from the trunk that is not ancestrally related to the trunk. My guess is it went something like this: They created a folder in branches. They checked out all the code from the trunk to somewhere on their desktop. They added all that code to the newly created folder as though it was a bunch of brand new files. So the repository isn't aware that all that code is actually just a copy of the trunk. When I look at the history of that branch in TortoiseSVN, and uncheck the "Stop on copy/rename" box, there is no revision that has the trunk (or any other path) under the "Copy from path" column. Then they made lots of changes on their "branch". Meanwhile, others were making lots of changes on the trunk. We tried to do a merge and of course it doesn't work. Because, the trunk and the fake branch are not ancestrally related. I can see only two ways to resolve this: Go through the logs on the "branch", look at every change that was made, and manually apply each change to the trunk. Go through the logs on the trunk, look at every change that was made between revision 540 (when the "branch" was created) and HEAD, and manually apply each change to the "branch". This involves 7 revisions one way or 11 revisions the other way, so neither one is really that terrible. But is there any way to cause the repository to "realize" that the branch really IS ancestrally related even though it was created incorrectly, so that we can take advantage of the built-in merging functionality in Eclipse/TortoiseSVN? (You may be wondering: Why did your company hire these people and allow them to access the SVN repository without making sure they knew how to use it properly first?! We didn't -- this is a school assignment, which is a collaboration between two different classes -- the ones in the lower class were given a very quick hand-wavey "overview" of SVN which didn't really teach them anything. I've asked everyone in the group to please PLEASE read the svn book, and I'll make sure we (the slightly more experienced half of the team) keep a close eye on the repository to ensure this doesn't happen again.)

    Read the article

  • How to commit my current changes to a different branch in git

    - by Auron
    Sometimes it happens that I make some changes in my working directory and I realize that these changes should be committed in a branch different to the current one. This usually happens when I want to try out new things or do some testing and I forget to create a new branch beforehand, but I don't want to commit dirty code to the master branch. So, how can I make that uncommitted changes (or changes stored in the index) be committed to a different branch than the current one?

    Read the article

  • Symfony2 Syntax Errors (in vendor files)

    - by user1665246
    To maintain code integrity across our servers we'd like to keep the /vendor/* directory under source control, rather than use composer to download files each time we roll out onto another server - i.e. we can be certain that the /vendor/* files are identical. We run a syntax checker against all files committed to source control and run across the following error: File '/vendor/sensio/generator-bundle/Sensio/Bundle/GeneratorBundle/Resources/skeleton/bundle/Bundle.php' failed the PHP syntax check with the following error: PHP Parse error: syntax error, unexpected '}', expecting T_NS_SEPARATOR in /vendor/sensio/generator-bundle/Sensio/Bundle/GeneratorBundle/Resources/skeleton/bundle/Bundle.php on line 3 Is the "error" in this file intentional ? Any help appreciated. File contents below: <?php namespace {{ namespace }}; use Symfony\Component\HttpKernel\Bundle\Bundle; class {{ bundle }} extends Bundle { }

    Read the article

  • Where am I? * (no branch)

    - by Neofizz
    I've been getting familiar with creating, merging and deleting branches. I like to know where I am so I don't commit work into the wrong branch. I use git branch -a to see which branches I have. I think the asterix * shows which branch I'm currently on. What does it mean when I get: * (no branch) master origin/HEAD Because when I $git checkout mybranch I expect to see * mybranch master origin/HEAD

    Read the article

  • git branch naming best practices

    - by skiphoppy
    I've been using a local git repository interacting with my group's CVS repository for several months, now. I've made an almost neurotic number of branches, most of which have thankfully merged back into my trunk. But naming is starting to become an issue. If I have a task easily named with a simple label, but I accomplish it in three stages which each include their own branch and merge situation, then I can repeat the branch name each time, but that makes the history a little confusing. If I get more specific in the names, with a separate description for each stage, then the branch names start to get long and unwieldy. I did learn looking through old threads here that I could start naming branches with a / in the name, i.e., topic/task, or something like that. I may start doing that and seeing if it helps keep things better organized. What are some best practices for naming git branches? Edit: Nobody has actually suggested any naming conventions. I do delete branches when I'm done with them. I just happen to have several around due to management constantly adjusting my priorities. :) As an example of why I might need more than one branch on a task, suppose I need to commit the first discrete milestone in the task to the group's CVS repository. At that point, due to my imperfect interaction with CVS, I would perform that commit and then kill that branch. (I've seen too much weirdness interacting with CVS if I try to continue to use the same branch at that point.)

    Read the article

  • Any suggestions for email delivery vendor?

    - by aXqd
    We are going to use email for registration and some other purpose of a website and we do not want to maintain our own email sending machine. That email delivery system need to respond in nealy real-time and be quite stable. Any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • git filter-branch chmod

    - by Evan Purkhiser
    I accidental had my umask set incorrectly for the past few months and somehow didn't notice. One of my git repositories has many files marked as executable that should be just 644. This repo has one main master branch, and about 4 private feature branches (that I keep rebased on top of the master). I've corrected the files in my master branch by running find -type f -exec chmod 644 {} \; and committing the changes. I then rebased my feature branches onto master. The problem is there are newly created files in the feature branches that are only in that branch, so they weren't corrected by my massive chmod commit. I didn't want to create a new commit for each feature branch that does the same thing as the commit I made on master. So I decided it would be best to go back through to each commit where a file was made and set the permissions. This is what I tried: git filter-branch -f --tree-filter 'chmod 644 `git show --diff-filter=ACR --pretty="format:" --name-only $GIT_COMMIT`; git add .' master.. It looked like this worked, but upon further inspection I noticed that the every commit after a commit containing a new file with the proper permissions of 644 would actually revert the change with something like: diff --git a b old mode 100644 new mode 100755 I can't for the life of me figure out why this is happening. I think I must be mis-understanding how git filter-branch works. My Solution I've managed to fix my problem using this command: git filter-branch -f --tree-filter 'FILES="$FILES "`git show --diff-filter=ACMR --pretty="format:" --name-only $GIT_COMMIT`; chmod 644 $FILES; true' development.. I keep adding onto the FILES variable to ensure that in each commit any file created at some point has the proper mode. However, I'm still not sure I really understand why git tracks the file mode for each commit. I had though that since I had fixed the mode of the file when it was first created that it would stay that mode unless one of my other commits explicit changed it to something else. That did not appear to the be the case. The reason I thought that this would work is from my understanding of rebase. If I go back to HEAD~5 and change a line of code, that change is propagated through, it doesn't just get changed back in HEAD~4.

    Read the article

  • Problem reintegrating a branch into the trunk in Subversion 1.5

    - by pako
    I'm trying to reintegrate a development branch into the trunk in my Subversion 1.5 repository. I merged all the changes from the trunk to the development branch prior to this operation. Now when I try to reintegrate the changes from the branch I get the following error message: Command: Reintegrate merge https://dev/svn/branches/devel into C:\trunk Error: Reintegrate can only be used if revisions 280 through 325 were previously Error: merged from https://dev/svn/trunk to the reintegrate Error: source, but this is not the case: Error: branches/devel/images/test Error: Missing ranges: /trunk/images/test:280-324 ... The message then goes on complaining about some folders in my project. But when I try to merge the changes from the trunk to the development branch again, TortoiseSVN tells me that there's nothing to merge (as I already merged all the changes before): Command: Merging revisions 1-HEAD of https://dev/svn/trunk into C:\devel, respecting ancestry Completed: C:\devel I'm trying to follow the instructions from here: http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.5/svn.branchmerge.basicmerging.html, but there's nothing about solving such a problem. Any ideas? Perhaps I should just delete the trunk and then make a copy of my branch? But I'm not really sure if it's safe.

    Read the article

  • git create branch with untracked files

    - by Surya
    I've a master branch with a .gitignore file with directory X listed in it. (X is not being tracked). When I try to add a branch tracking a remote using the command git checkout -b mybranch origin/mybranch The remote branch is tracking X directory, and hence this checkout fails with the error Untracked working tree file 'X' would be overwritten by merge. what is the way out ? Surya

    Read the article

  • Using the slash character in Git branch name

    - by faB
    I'm pretty sure I saw somewhere in a popular Git project the branches had a pattern like "feature/xyz". However when I try to create a branch with the slash character, I get an error: $ git branch foo/bar error: unable to resolve reference refs/heads/labs/feature: Not a directory fatal: Failed to lock ref for update: Not a directory Same problem for (my initial attempt): $ git checkout -b foo/bar How does one create a branch in Git with the slash character?

    Read the article

  • Undoing branch creation in Mercurial

    - by michaelmior
    How can I undo the creation of a branch in Mercurial? For example, if I issue the command hg branch newbranch How can I delete this branch if I decide I entered the wrong name? I'm guessing this must be pretty simple to do, but I have yet to figure it out. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • merging selected revisions from one branch on another in Mercurial

    - by Assaf Lavie
    Is it possible to merge a range of revisions from one branch to another in Mercurial? e.g. |r1 |r2 |r3 |\___ | | r5 | | r6 | | r7 | | ... | | r40 |r41 If I want to merge revisions 6 & 7, but not 5, into the main branch - is this possible? What about multiple selected revision ranges from branch A to branch B? e.g. merge 4-7, 20-25 and 30-34? (this isn't a real case, just an illustration. I'm trying to understand if hg has this revision-range merge feature that I know svn has)

    Read the article

  • Git doesn't sync files until committed, even if checked out in a different branch

    - by DertWaiter
    Okay, I have git 1.7.11.1 on Windows and I have a local test repository with 2 branches. One is master with index.php and help.php. I then create another branch called slave :) I run from git bash rm help.php and it disappears from the folder, but I don't stage anything. I switch to checkout master branch and it is supposed to restore file help.php because it is not modified in the master branch, isn't it? And it does not do it. When I go back to the slave branch and commit and then switch to checkout master then help.php appears. Is that the way it is supposed to to work? Why?

    Read the article

  • Track someone's GitHub repo in a branch

    - by drhorrible
    I'm pretty new to Git, and like it a lot so far, but am not sure what do do here. I've forked a github project, and am currently in the process of porting it to another language. For reference, I've created a branch of the code as it was when I made the fork. My problem now is that the original project has been updated, and I can't figure out how to pull those changes into my branch from the original master (because 'origin' points to my github project). Follow-up question for my own education, what command will the owner of the original project have to run in order to pull a change in from my branch into his master branch?

    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 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >