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 23/33 | < Previous Page | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >

  • TeamCity + HG. Only pull (push?) passing builds

    - by ColoradoMatt
    Feels like with the popularity of continuous integration this one should be a piece of cake but I am stumped. I am setting up TeamCity with HG. I want to be able to push changesets up to a repository that TeamCity watches and runs builds on changes. That's easy. Next, if a build passes, I want that changeset to be pulled into a "clean" repository... one that contains only passing changesets. Should be easy but... TeamCity 6 supports multiple build steps and if any step fails, the rest don't run. My thought was to put a build step at the end that does a pull (or optionally a push?) to get the passing changeset into the clean repository. I am trying to use PsExec to run hg on the box with the repositories. If I try to run just a plain 'hg pull' it can't find the hg.exe even though it is set in the path and I have used the -w flag. I have tried putting a .bat file in the clean repository that takes a revision parameter and it works fine... locally. When I try to run the .bat file remotely (using PsExec) it runs everything fine but it tries to run it on the build agent. Even if I set the -w argument it runs the .bat file there but tries to run the contents on the build agent box. Am I just WAY off in my approach? Seems like this is a pretty obvious thing to do so either my Google skills are waning or no one thinks this is worthy of writing about. Either way, I am stuck in SVN land trying to get out so I would appreciate some help!

    Read the article

  • How to branch with TortoiseHG

    - by Michael Tiller
    I downloaded TortoiseHg 1.0 for evaluation. For the life of me I can't figure out how to make a branch. It seems to understand branches (e.g. in its repository browser) but I just can't seem to find a way to make a branch. This seems like such a fundamental capability since out of the often touted benefits of DVC is the lightweight branching. I Googled around and couldn't find much discussion of this topic (at least for recent versions) so I have to assume I'm missing something, right?

    Read the article

  • Prevent "hg status" from showing everything under untracked directories

    - by Wei Hu
    I find the output of hg status too verbose for untracked directories. Suppose I have an empty repository that's managed by both git and hg. So there would be two directories, .git and .hg. The output of git status is: # Untracked files: # (use "git add <file>..." to include in what will be committed) # # .hg/ The output of hg status is: ? .git/HEAD ? .git/config ? .git/description ? .git/hooks/applypatch-msg.sample ? .git/hooks/commit-msg.sample ? .git/hooks/post-commit.sample ? .git/hooks/post-receive.sample ? .git/hooks/post-update.sample ? .git/hooks/pre-applypatch.sample ? .git/hooks/pre-commit.sample ? .git/hooks/pre-rebase.sample ? .git/hooks/prepare-commit-msg.sample ? .git/hooks/update.sample ? .git/info/exclude Is there a way to reduce its output to something like the following line? ? .git/

    Read the article

  • .hgignore whole directory tree excepting one specific file

    - by John Mee
    Can anyone tell me the .hgignore pattern to track one specific file in a directory and to ignore everything else? I have a "media" directory which contains a "default.png", for obvious purposes, and the rest of the directory will hold user media. We want hg to ignore everything in the media directory excepting the default file.

    Read the article

  • Mecurial vs Subversion

    - by Jeremy E
    I have a medium sized team of developers who moved to Subversion last December from VSS and I wanted to hear from people who have used both Mecurial and Subversion and get their feedback. What do they really like about Mecurial? What sucks? Is there a better open source tool? I didn't really want to put my devs through the whole source control migration thing again unless it is really worth it. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • .hgignore directory "_notes" throughout repository tree?

    - by Subu
    I want to ignore all directories "_notes" throughout a repository. _notes is generated by dreamweaver and is not part of the project itself, but these directories are scattered throughout the project. Somehow ^_notes$ is not doing the job in .hgignore ... Do I have to direct .hgignore to each and every directory "_notes" or does it do it recursively? I am not quite sure about the man pages

    Read the article

  • Named previously unnamed branch

    - by Jab
    It seems naming a previously unnamed branch doesn't really work out. It creates a nasty multiple heads problem that I can't find a solution for. Here is the workflow... UserA starts working on feature that they expect to be small, so they just start working(off the default branch). The change turns out to be a large project and will need multiple contributors. So UserA issues... hg branch "Feature1" and continues working, committing locally s needed. UserA then pulls down the changes from the central repo so he can push. At this point, why does hg heads return 3 heads? It shows 2 for default and 1 for Feature1. The first head for default is the latest change by another user on the branch(irrelevant). The second default head is the commit prior to the hg branch "Feature1" commit. The central repository has rules enforced so that only 1 head per branch is allowed, so forcing a push isn't an option. The repo doesn't want multiple heads on the default branch. UserA should be able to push these changes so that other users can see the Feature1 branch and help out. I can't seem to find a way to "correct" this. I don't think I can re-write the branch of the initial commits for the feature, before it was a named branch. I know the initial changes before the named branch are technically on the default branch, but does that mean they will be heads until that Feature1 branch is merged?

    Read the article

  • Is there a recommended command for "hg bisect --command"?

    - by blokeley
    I have an emergent bug that I've got to track down tomorrow. I know a previous hg revision which was good so I'm thinking about using hg bisect. However, I'm on Windows and don't want to get into DOS scripting. Ideally, I'd be able to write a Python unit test and have hg bisect use that. This is my first attempt. bisector.py #!/usr/bin/env python import sys import unittest class TestCase(unittest.TestCase): def test(self): #raise Exception('Exception for testing.') #self.fail("Failure for testing.") pass def main(): suite = unittest.defaultTestLoader.loadTestsFromTestCase(TestCase) result = unittest.TestResult() suite.run(result) if result.errors: # Skip the revision return 125 if result.wasSuccessful(): return 0 else: return 1 if '__main__' == __name__: sys.exit(main()) Perhaps I could then run: hg bisect --reset hg bisect --bad hg bisect --good -r 1 hg bisect --command=bisector.py Is there a better way of doing it? Thanks for any advice.

    Read the article

  • How to break connection between a clone repository and its parent

    - by nc97217
    I have some (local) repositories, an original and some clones. The original repository has been corrupted so I'd like to get rid of it and use one of the clones as the master for future development. Is there a better way to break the connection between the new master and the original repository than simply deleting the default entry in the [paths] section of that clone's hgrc? Similarly, in the other clones, can I simply change the default entry in their hgrc files' [paths] section to point to the new master repository?

    Read the article

  • Scalable (half-million files) version control system

    - by hashable
    We use SVN for our source-code revision control and are experimenting using it for non-source-code files. We are working with a large set (300-500k) of short (1-4kB) text files that will be updated on a regular basis and need to version control it. We tried using SVN in flat-file mode and it is struggling to handle the first commit (500k files checked in) taking about 36 hours. On a daily basis, we need the system to be able to handle 10k modified files per commit transaction in a short time (<5 min). My questions: Is SVN the right solution for my purpose. The initial speed seems too slow for practical use. If Yes, is there a particular svn server implementation that is fast? (We are currently using the gnu/linux default svn server and command line client.) If No, what are the best f/oss/commercial alternatives Thanks

    Read the article

  • Why TortoiseHg not show the "merge conflict"?

    - by Jian Lin
    Short version of the question: Since I already have TortoiseHg, I right clicked on that file trying to see the merge conflict visually, but there is no way to see it? Details: To make a simple case of merge conflict, I hg init a repo on Win 7, and then clone it to another folder. Now, in one working directory, i added the line "the code is 123", committed. And in the other folder, i did an "hg pull" and "hg update" Now, I go back to the first folder, and change "123" to "123abc", and then do an "hg commit" And then I go to the other folder and edit "123" to "123xyz" over there, and do an "hg commit", and when "hg push", it says it can't. So I try to use any visual tool to see how the conflict is like, but ... TortoiseHg doesn't seem to have any option to do that?

    Read the article

  • How do I permanently remove (obliterate) files from history?

    - by phmr
    I commited a lot of files locally (including binary files removing & adding...) and now when I try to push it takes a lot of time. Actually I messed up my local repo history. How could I avoid this mistake in the future ? Can I transform a set of local revision 1-2-3-4 to 1-2 with 2 being the final revision of the local clone ?

    Read the article

  • Merging branches in tortoiseHg does not seem to work

    - by Spock
    In a project, I have a default branch and another named branch. After a merging both branches and committing it, the graph in TortoiseHg shows that both branches have been merged. However, pushing to a remote repository (which is at the stage before branching, it only has the default branch), I get the message "abort: push creates new remote branches". If I'm not mistaken, I'm left with one branch after merging, so why this error message? Note: the graph still shows that I have 2 heads, is it in anyway related to this?

    Read the article

  • Should checkins be small steps or complete features?

    - by Caspin
    Two of version controls uses seem to dictate different checkin styles. distibution centric: changesets will generally reflect a complete feature. In general these checkins will be larger. This style is more user/maintainer friendly. rollback centric: changesets will be individual small steps so the history can function like an incredibly powerful undo. In general these checkins will be smaller. This style is more developer friendly. I like to use my version control as really powerful undo while while I banging away at some stubborn code/bug. In this way I'm not afraid to make drastic changes just to try out a possible solution. However, this seems to give me a fragmented file history with lots of "well that didn't work" checkins. If instead I try to have my changeset reflect complete features I loose the use of my version control software for experimentation. However, it is much easier for user/maintainers to figure out how the code is evolving. Which has great advantages for code reviews, managing multiple branches, etc. So what's a developer to do? checkin small steps or complete features?

    Read the article

  • How to setup and teardown temporary django db for unit testing?

    - by blokeley
    I would like to have a python module containing some unit tests that I can pass to hg bisect --command. The unit tests are testing some functionality of a django app, but I don't think I can use hg bisect --command manage.py test mytestapp because mytestapp would have to be enabled in settings.py, and the edits to settings.py would be clobbered when hg bisect updates the working directory. Therefore, I would like to know if something like the following is the best way to go: import functools, os, sys, unittest sys.path.append(path_to_myproject) os.environ['DJANGO_SETTINGS_MODULE'] = 'myapp.settings' def with_test_db(func): """Decorator to setup and teardown test db.""" @functools.wraps def wrapper(*args, **kwargs): try: # Set up temporary django db func(*args, **kwargs) finally: # Tear down temporary django db class TestCase(unittest.TestCase): @with_test_db def test(self): # Do some tests using the temporary django db self.fail('Mark this revision as bad.') if '__main__' == __name__: unittest.main() I should be most grateful if you could advise either: If there is a simpler way, perhaps subclassing django.test.TestCase but not editing settings.py or, if not; What the lines above that say "Set up temporary django db" and "Tear down temporary django db" should be?

    Read the article

  • How do you use build labels in publishers in cruisecontrol?

    - by Omnifarious
    I have this section in my CruiseControl config.xml file: <publishers> <onsuccess> <artifactspublisher dest="artifacts/${project.name}" file="projects/${project.name}/fred"/> <execute command="hg -R hg-succeeded/${project.name} pull"/> <execute command="hg -R hg-succeeded/${project.name} tag -l build-${label} -r tip"/> </onsuccess> </publishers> I'm getting tags that look like build-${label}. The ${label} part isn't being replaced by the build label like I expect. I'm expecting something like build.1 to show up in place of ${label}. How do I make this happen? I do have the default labelincrementer configured with a <labelincrementer /> tag in my project. Also, the CruiseControl documentation is absolutely awful. Is there better documentation anywhere?

    Read the article

  • Converting a company from SVN to Hg?

    - by Michael
    We're a heavy user of SVN here. While the advantages of GIT over SVN made us want to change, the advantages of Hg over SVN mean it's now time to change and we need to start doing so very soon. I'm not so worried on the client side, but here are my questions. There are some excellent books on setting file metaproperties, properly organizing projects, etc on SVN. What is that book(s) for Hg? Is there a way to convert an SVN repository (that you've used) and can report how well it went? We don't want to lose years of commit logs if possible. When you DO convert, how did you split up the old code? Did you commit trunk as one project, and tags/forks as another? If you used SVN for legacy work, did you check in updates to SVN or something else?

    Read the article

  • Local-only version of `hg outgoing`?

    - by Grumdrig
    The command hg outgoing compares the local repo to the default push location; it accesses the push location to do it. I'd like to ask the question "have I checked in changes in my local repo since my last hg push?" without having to access the remote repo. It seems like there might be enough info in the local repo to figure that out; if so, is there a command to determine that?

    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 | 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30  | Next Page >