Search Results

Search found 4819 results on 193 pages for 'git merge'.

Page 50/193 | < Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >

• Automatically pulling on remote server with Git push?

  - by Vernon

  Here's what I'm trying to do: I have a GitHub repository, a portion of which I'd like to make web viewable. Right now I've cloned the repository on my own server and it works well, but in order to keep it up to date, I have to manually login and pull the latest changes. I'm not sure if this is the best idea (or the best approach), but I'd like the remote server to automatically pull whenever someone pushes to repository. GitHub makes it easy enough to run a script when someone pushes, but I'm not sure how to pull once someone does that. I was using PHP for simplicity, but just doing something like git pull naturally doesn't work because of permissions. Is this a bad idea or is there another way of achieving what I want to do? This seems like a common set up, but I wasn't sure. Thanks.

  Read the article

• Setting up a Git remote with a truncated history

  - by drg

  I am in the midst of doing some non-standard, probably doomed, experiments on a git repository. The goal is to create a remote repository with a truncated history which can still share commits with an internal repository which has a full history. I've had some success using a graft to connect the public history with the private history - when I push from my internal repository, only the post-graft contents are included. So my main question is: what is the simplest way of taking a commit, eliminating its parent and writing a graft in place of the parent? A more general question: is what I'm trying to do going to cause me pain in the long run, do you know if there's a better way?

  Read the article

• Deleting branches in git causes gitk to go wild

  - by a2h

  I decided to delete a few branches from a (personal project) repository of mine that were merged into master after confirming on #git that leftover branches aren't really necessary. However, gitk's visualisation of my repository's history as a result has been completely screwed up. Basically something like this: With those branches from commits appearing out of nowhere eventually going back into some other commits up ahead. A merge did not occur at all of the points, and I only had around 5 extra branches. Is this normal? Is there any fix for this?

  Read the article

• How to move a branch backwards in git?

  - by karlthorwald

  The title is not very clear. What I actually need to do often is the following: Let's say I have a development going on with several commits c1,c2,... and 3 branches A,B,C c1--c2--c3--(B)--c4--(A,C) Branch A and C are at the same commit. Now I want branch A to go back where B is, so that it loks like this: c1--c2--c3--(A,B)--c4--(C) Important is that this has to happen locally and on github. Sorry for my bad git speak, I hope I can make clear what it is.

  Read the article

• Can I undo the last git push?

  - by Stray

  A team member accidentally pushed half a gig of unwanted zips to the remote repo last night when they were in a rush. Yes... oops. Nobody has pulled or committed since. Ideally I want to just 'undo' what happened. I have looked at filter-branch and was thinking of trying something like git filter-branch --tree-filter 'rm -f *.zip' HEAD but that would be local, and I can't figure out how to do it direct on the remote repo. Is there a simpler way to undo what happened? If she amends her last commit and pushes again will that undo the push - ie actually remove those files from the history? Obviously if she deletes them, commits and pushes again then that still leaves the content in the repo, which is no good.

  Read the article

• Is nothing truly ever deleted in git?

  - by allenskd

  I'm currently learning git, usually I'm a bit skeptic of VCS since I have a hard time getting used to them. I deleted a branch called "experimental" with some tmp files, I saw the files removed in my working directory so I scratched my head and wondered if this is normal, can I bring it back in case I need it again, etc. I found the SHA making the commit of the tmp files and recreated the branch with the provided sha and saw it again with all the files and their current content. Everything I do in the working directory can be reverted once I commit it? Might seem like a silly question to many people, but it kinda intrigues me so I want to know the limits

  Read the article

• Branch for each developer in GIT repo

  - by Peter

  I'd like to move my project to GitHub from local svn repository. Multiple developers are curently working on this project. I was thinking that each developer should have their own branch in which they would commit changes. When manager review their work, he will merge it into master branch. I don't want separate repository for each developer as GitHub has limited number of private repositories. Is this a good idea? What are other alternatives?

  Read the article

• Is there a database with git-like qualities?

  - by Mat

  I'm looking for a database where multiple users can contribute and commit new data; other users can then pull that data into their own database repository, all in a git-like manner. A transcriptional database, if you like; does such a thing exist? My current thinking is to dump the database to a single file as SQL, but that could well get unwieldy once it is of any size. Another option is to dump the database and use the filesystem, but again it gets unwieldy once of any size.

  Read the article

• Problems getting git 'server' to work on Windows

  - by Benjol

  I've followed the Tim's article (mentioned in the answer to this question), but - like many others, it seems - I'm stuck when trying do the test clone at the end. I get the fatal: the remote end hung up unexpectedly error, even though my $HOME path seems to be right. Anyone got any pointers to where I might start for debugging this? My git and linux-fu are severely limited... I'm aware of this answer to the same question, but it doesn't apply in my case, I don't get any messages about paths.

  Read the article

• SVN tool to rebase a branch in git style

  - by timmow

  Are there any tools available that will let me rebase in git style an SVN branch onto a new parent? So, in the following situation, I create a feature branch, and there are commits to the trunk E---F---G Feature / A---B---C---D--H--I trunk I'm looking for a tool which copies the trunk, and applies the commits one by one, letting me resolve any conflicts if any exist - but each commit retains the same commit message, and is still a separate commit. E'---F'---G' Feature / A---B---C---D--H--I trunk So commit E' will be a commit with the same changes as E, except in the case of E causing a conflict, in which case E' will differ from E in that E' has the conflicts resolved, and the same commit message as E. I'm looking for this as it helps in keeping branches up to date with trunk - the svnmerge.py / mergeinfo way does not help, as you still need to resolve your changes when you merge back to trunk.

  Read the article

• How to keep .cproject local to each user while working collaboratively through git

  - by Don't panic

  I have a C++ project that I am working on with several other people. Some of us have Macs with OSX and some of us have PCs with either Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. We are currently using eclipse to edit the project and git for version control. The problem is that whenever you change property settings on one team member's computer the .cproject file is updated. Because different configurations/ file extensions are used across OSX and Windows we want the .cproject file to remain local. We have tried untracking .cproject through a gitignore for the .cproject file, but that just removes the .cproject file from the repository all together. We have also tried setting up an assumed-unchanged for .cproject but if .cproject is changed all this leads to is the need to manually deal with conflicts and updates. Is there any way to keep the file in the repository, but only change it locally? Ie merging would not update the .cproject file.

  Read the article

• Multiple Concurrent Changes Using SVN, GIT, and CVS

  - by KlaxSmashing

  At work, we are using SVN, CVS, and GIT because there any many projects that were started at various times. Anyway, a common sequence that occurs is as follows: Working on task A, making changes to project Has new task B, some bug or functionality needs to be done on project, independent of task A but may affect same set of files Check in task B Check in task A Unfortunately, what I do at this time is two maintain 2 working copies of each project. So I can always work on task B from a clean copy. As you can imagine, this is wasteful and also, does not scale well (task C, D, E, etc.) For each of these versioning systems, are there commands that can help me do the following: "Save" task A, reverting working copy to current repository Work on task B, check in changes "Restore" task A changes back to working copy

  Read the article

• Git pull: error: Entry foo not uptodate. Cannot merge.

  - by yuit

  I'm trying to update my repo from a remote branch and keep getting this error when I do a "git pull". I haven't made any local changes, and even if I have I don't need to keep them. I've tried: git reset --hard and I get the same problem The only thing that seems to work is deleting the offending file and try a git pull again. I've also tried "git stash" followed by a "git pull". No go. edit: using PortableGit-1.6.4-preview20090729 so any previous bugs with spurious errors should be fixed.

  Read the article

• Reorganising git commits into different branches

  - by user1425706

  I am trying to reorganise my git tree so that it is structured a bit better. Basically at the moment I have a single master branch with a couple of small feature branches that split from it. I want to go back and reorder it so that the only commits in the main branch are the ones corresponding to new version numbers and then have all the in between commits reside in a separate develop branch from which the feature branches split from too. Basically I'm looking for a tool that will let me completely manually reorganise the tree. I thought maybe that interactive rebasing was what I was looking for but trying to do so in sourcetree makes it seem like it is not the right tool. Can anyone give me some advice on how best to proceed. Below is a diagram of my current structure: featureA x-x-x / \ master A-x-x-x-x-B-x-x-x-C D Desired structure: feature x-x-x / | develop x-x-x-x-x-x-x - / | | | master A - B - C - D

  Read the article

• git : The remote end hung up unexpectedly - too many simultaneous users?

  - by Pritam Barhate

  I asked this first on StackOverflow and I was suggested that I should ask it here: We have a self hosted git server (Gitolite) on a VPS account (CPU:2.68GHz RAM:1824MB). This same VPS is also used to publish our underdevelopment web apps for client demos. (Very little traffic). so the main use of the server is as a Git Server Only. This git server is accessed by a team of 30-40 people for various projects. Our problem is that during the day when 6-7 people are trying to access the server (sometimes same repo) we get frequent error message: ssh: connect to host xxx.xxx.xx.xx port 22: Bad file number fatal: The remote end hung up unexpectedly After trying for 10-15 minutes it generally succeeds. During early mornings and late nights when there are only 1-2 people, git commands work with 100% success rate. Also I would like to note that if I access the other file hosted on the server through HTTP it works fine. I found a couple of questions on StackOverflow and on other sites regarding this. But most of the people point towards SSH key set up or conflicts between Msysgit and Cygns SSH. However I don't think this is the problem in our case as we get this behavior on Windows (using msysgit only) as well as Mac Machines. Also if it was SSH configuration issue then it shouldn't work at all. But in our case it works after 10-15 minutes. I think in our case it might be too many simultaneous connections to same server (or same repo) or something like that. Does there exists a setting or a conf file that needs to modified to solve this problem? Please help me solve this problem or point me in the right direction. Thanks in advance. Pritam.

  Read the article

• I'm a SubVersion geek, why I should consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DRCS?

  - by Pierre 303

  I tried to understand the benefits of DRCS. I must recognize I still doesn't get it. Here are my current beliefs. I'm ready to destroy them thanks to your expertise. I know I'm probably resisting to change. I just want to evaluate how much that change will cost me. Merging hell can be solved by just applying good practices such as continuous integration. There is no such good practice than having a private branch for a few days when you are in a self managing team with real collaboration. I use branching for that for very rare cases, and I keep a branch for every major version, in which I fix bugs merged from the trunk. I see the value of committing offline then pushing online. But continuous integration can help on this too. I work on very large projects, and I never noticed SubVersion to be slow even when the server is 5000km away on the internet and my small connection (less than 1024D/128U). Harddisk space is cheap, so having a copy of source code locally doesn't look like a problem to me. I already have a full copy of the last version on my disk. I don't understand the distributed thing there (maybe THIS IS the key to my understanding?) I not new in the industry, and judging by my difficulty to understand, I don't think DRCS are easier to understand than SubVersion like. If fact, I don't understand... Doctor, give me your diagnostic.

  Read the article

• I'm a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS?

  - by user2567

  I try to understand the benefits of distributed version control system (DVCS). I found Subversion Re-education and this article by Martin Fowler very useful. Mercurial and others DVCS promote a new way of working on code with changesets and local commits. It prevents from merging hell and other collaboration issues We are not affected by this as I practice continuous integration and working alone in a private branch is not an option, unless we are experimenting. We use a branch for every major version, in which we fix bugs merged from the trunk. Mercurial allows you to have lieutenants I understand this can be useful for very large projects like Linux, but I don't see the value in small and highly collaborative teams (5 to 7 people). Mercurial is faster, takes less disk space and full local copy allows faster logs & diffs operations. I'm not concerned by this either, as I didn't notice speed or space problems with SVN even with very large projects I'm working on. I'm seeking for your personal experiences and/or opinions from former SVN geeks. Especially regarding the changesets concept and overall performance boost you measured. UPDATE (12th Jan): I'm now convinced that it worth a try. UPDATE (12th Jun): I kissed Mercurial and I liked it. The taste of his cherry local commits. I kissed Mercurial just to try it. I hope my SVN Server don't mind it. It felt so wrong. It felt so right. Don't mean I'm in love tonight. FINAL UPDATE (29th Jul): I had the privilege to review Eric Sink's next book called Version Control by Example. He finished to convince me. I'll go for Mercurial.

  Read the article

• SSIS Basics: Using the Merge Join Transformation

  SSIS is able to take sorted data from more than one OLE DB data source and merge them into one table which can then be sent to an OLE DB destination. This 'Merge Join' transformation works in a similar way to a SQL join by specifying a 'join key' relationship. this transformation can save a great deal of processing on the destination. Annette Allen, as usual, gives clear guidance on how to do it.

  Read the article

• SSIS Basics: Using the Merge Join Transformation

  SSIS is able to take sorted data from more than one OLE DB data source and merge them into one table which can then be sent to an OLE DB destination. This 'Merge Join' transformation works in a similar way to a SQL join by specifying a 'join key' relationship. this transformation can save a great deal of processing on the destination. Annette Allen, as usual, gives clear guidance on how to do it.

  Read the article

• Stairway to T-SQL DML Level 12: Using the MERGE Statement

  The final level of this stairway looks at the MERGE statement in detail, focusing on how to perform insert, update and delete logic using the MERGE statement. An accidental DBA? Try SQL MonitorUse the 30-day full product free trial to get easy-to-understand insights into SQL Server, and get suggestions on how to solve the type of issues that are uncovered. Begin your free trial.

  Read the article

• How can I create a new branch in git from an existing file tree?

  - by pkaeding

  I am looking to add an existing file tree to a git repository as a new branch (I can't just copy the existing tree into my git tree, since the existing tree is versioned under a different VCS, and I am trying to sync them up). Is this possible? EDIT: Would setting up a new git repository, that is connected to the existing remote repository, and then moving the resulting .git folder work? That seems really hackish, but if that's the way to do it...

  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 can I get 'git status' to always use short format?

  - by Adam Lindberg

  I'd like git status to always use the short format: $ git status --short M src/meck.erl M test/meck_tests.erl ?? erl_crash.dump ?? meck_test_module.coverdata There does not seem to exist a configuration option for this, and git config --global alias.status "status --short" does not work. I haven't managed to create and alias in zsh either. How can I make git status to use the short format by default.

  Read the article

• How can I show the contents of a file at a specific state of a git repo?

  - by richcollins

  I want to show the contents of a file given by a path at a specific state of a git repo. I unsuccessfully tried this: git show f825334150cd4bc8f46656b2daa8fa1e92f7796d:Katana/source/Git/GitLocalBranch.h fatal: ambiguous argument 'f825334150cd4bc8f46656b2daa8fa1e92f7796d:Katana/source/Git/GitLocalBranch.h': unknown revision or path not in the working tree. Use '--' to separate paths from revisions The commit in question didn't modify the file specified. How can I show the contents of a file at a given state (specified by a commit hash) regardless of the involvement of the file in the commit?

  Read the article

• Is it possible to store only a checksum of a large file in git?

  - by Andrew Grimm

  I'm a bioinformatician currently extracting normal-sized sequences from genomic files. Some genomic files are large enough that I don't want to put them into the main git repository, whereas I'm putting the extracted sequences into git. Is it possible to tell git "Here's a large file - don't store the whole file, just take its checksum, and let me know if that file is missing or modified." If that's not possible, I guess I'll have to either git-ignore the large files, or, as suggested in this question, store them in a submodule.

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57  | Next Page >