Search Results

Search found 47336 results on 1894 pages for 'version control cheat she'.

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 59/1894 | < Previous Page | 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >

  • Why not commit unresolved changes?

    - by Explosion Pills
    In a traditional VCS, I can understand why you would not commit unresolved files because you could break the build. However, I don't understand why you shouldn't commit unresolved files in a DVCS (some of them will actually prevent you from committing the files). Instead, I think that your repository should be locked from pushing and pulling, but not committing. Being able to commit during the merging process has several advantages (as I see it): The actual merge changes are in history. If the merge was very large, you could make periodic commits. If you made a mistake, it would be much easier to roll back (without having to redo the entire merge). The files could remain flagged as unresolved until they were marked as resolved. This would prevent pushing/pulling. You could also potentially have a set of changesets act as the merge instead of just a single one. This would allow you to still use tools such as git rerere. So why is committing with unresolved files frowned upon/prevented? Is there any reason other than tradition?

    Read the article

  • Structure of a Git repository

    - by Luke Puplett
    Sorry if this is a duplicate, I looked. We're moving to Git. In Subversion, I'm used to having \trunk, \branches and \tags folders. With Git, switching between branches will replace the contents of the working directory, so am I right to assume that the way we used to work just doesn't apply with Git? My guess is that I'd have a repo folder with maybe a gitignore and readme.txt, then the folders for the projects that make up the repo, and that's it.

    Read the article

  • What is the term for a really BIG source code commit?

    - by Ida
    Sometimes when we check the commit history of a software, we may see that there are a few commits that are really BIG - they may change 10 or 20 files with hundreds of changed source code lines (delta). I remember that there is a commonly used term for such BIG commit but I can't recall exactly what that term is. Can anyone help me? What is the term that programmers usually use to refer to such BIG and giant commit? BTW, is committing a lot of changes all together a good practice? UPDATE: thank you guys for the inspiring discussion! But I think "code bomb" is the term that I'm looking for.

    Read the article

  • Fixing a bug while working on a different part of the code base

    - by imgx64
    This happened at least once to me. I'm working on some part of the code base and find a small bug in a different part, and the bug stops me from completing what I'm currently trying to do. Fixing the bug could be as simple as changing a single statement. What do you do in that situation? Fix the bug and commit it together with your current work Save your current work elsewhere, fix the bug in a separate commit, then continue your work [1] Continue what you're supposed to do, commit the code (even if it breaks the build fails some tests), then fix the bug (and the build make tests pass) in a separate commit [1] In practice, this would mean: clone the original repository elsewhere, fix the bug, commit/push the changes, pull the commit to the repository you're working on, merge the changes, and continue your work. Edit: I changed number three to reflect what I really meant.

    Read the article

  • Using gerrit (or similar tool) on a team where multiple devs work on a single feature

    - by Bacon
    We have a team of roughly ~8 devs who regularly work on the same feature over the course of a 3 week sprint. It isn't quite pair programming, but in our current workflow devs regularly push up incomplete code for a colleague to complete. This worked fine before we introduced Gerrit, but now our commits need to represent chunks of test-passing, complete, logical functionality, and so the model breaks. My only idea is to have everybody push up to a separate, untracked branch up until the functionality is ready for review, then squash everything into commits that make sense and push up. Is there another Gerrit-ized workflow that could work? I know this is a widely discussed topic on Google Groups, and that there has recently been some discussion of Gerrit topic reviews, but I wanted to see if there is anybody out there using Gerrit in this way, and what the suggested workflow would be.

    Read the article

  • What is Google's repository like?

    - by Ricket
    I heard Google has a giant private (internal) repository of all of their code and their employees have access to it so that when they are developing things they don't have to reinvent the wheel. I'd like to know more about it! Is there anyone here from Google that can describe it in a bit more detail, or do you know a bit more about it? I'm interested in knowing mainly about how it's organized and how they can make it easy for an employee to find something in such a giant codebase as it must be.

    Read the article

  • Upgrading an app to support iOS5, 6 and 7

    - by drekka
    We are looking at an app that needs an upgrade. Currently it runs on iOS4, 5 & 6. The upgrade will move to iOS5, 6 & 7. It will also involve some UI changes and new features. I've been reading stuff on iOS7 and looking at things like auto-layout. What we are trying to figure out is the best way to handle the differences between the various iOS versions. Auto-layout seems like a good idea, but it's not available on iOS 5. There are also API changes to consider between all 3 versions and other new features of iOS7. So the questions: How would you handle auto layout given iOS5 does not have it? Are there any significant differences between the SDKs that you think would cause issues? Would we be better off with separate code bases?

    Read the article

  • Which Git-based MIS to track workflow like Trac/Redmine but on console minimastically?

    - by hhh
    Definitions MIS = management information system Some list about console based solutions here and some GUI-hacks here. Been fed up to install all those dependencies and no make -files with GUI -things so which console-based MIS would you suggest for a game-development team with graphical -repo, animation -repo, code -repo, stories -repo, etc ? P.s. I do use Git -submodules and the reason for repo -fragmentation is due to roles and size, certain repos such as graphic -repos tend to be quite large so better to keep them separate. Perhaps useful to readers interested about this http://stackoverflow.com/questions/5881578/trac-vs-redmine https://github.com/jchris/sofa

    Read the article

  • Why is git-svn useful?

    - by Wes
    I have read these related questions: I'm a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS? git for personal (one-man) projects. Overkill? ...and I understand why git is useful. What I don't understand is why tools like git-svn that allow git to integrate with svn are useful. When, for example, a team is working with svn, or any other centralised SCM, why would a member of the team opt to use git-svn? Are there any practical advantages for a developer that has to synchronize with a centralized repository?

    Read the article

  • Disable updates on certain softwares

    - by tadatma
    When on trying to update an ubuntu distro (or for that matter any linux distribution) I often find a list of updates amounting to more than 150 mb or so. To my displeasure I find that the culprit more often than not has to do with libreoffice. I know I can untick those connected with libreoffice but I wonder if there is an elegant way; may be a small program in between that helps me untick those programs that I wish to stay un-updated.

    Read the article

  • Are there any reasons to use Bazaar over Hg or Git?

    - by NeuronQ
    The world of DVCSs seems split between Git and Mercurial nowadays, but lots of projects and places (like my new employer) use Bazaar. And it's not a thing of inertia where people just use something because "that's how it's always been done", these guys are agile and sometimes seem to embrace change just for the fun of having more things to fix. Yet no one gave me any convincing arguments for using Bzr over Hg or Git. I can get seeing Git as "too complicated" but you can't use this king of judgement between Hg and Bzr. So then, what are the features of Bazaar that would justify its use over Mercurial (or Git) in any given situation?

    Read the article

  • Tracking work history in a git repo

    - by Code-Guru
    Previous related questions: Code bases for desktop and mobile versions of the same app Git branching and tagging best practices Question: I have split my repo into three directories (swing, android, and common) as suggested by @KarlBielefeldt in response to my previous question. Now I am jumping back and forth between developing my Android port and tweaking/adding features to my original Swing app. All of my commits are linear (fast-forward) and only my commit messages give hints indicating whether I'm working on my Swing app or my Android app. Is there a better way to keep track of the work flow in my git repo?

    Read the article

  • Samsung RV520 with 12.04 freezes while having WiFi and brightness control issues

    - by daveu1
    I have a new Samsung RV520 and have just installed Precise Pangolin 12.04 LTS. I am having serious problems now with the wifi constantly disconnecting. This then causes the brightness control to appear on the screen. The screen starts flickering and then freezes the whole machine. Indeed the brightness control doesn't work at all. I am using a Intel Centrino N wireless card. Please can anyone provide any guidance as to how to resolve these issue on this machine. Many thanks for your help.

    Read the article

  • What is the canonical approach to using a VCS right from a project's infancy?

    - by Anonymous -
    Background I've used VCS (mainly git) in the past to manage many existing projects and it works great. Typically with an existing project, I would check in each change I make to the code that either optimizes or changes the overall functionality (you know what I mean, in suitable steps, not every single line I change). Problem One thing I've not had so much practise at is creating new projects. I'm in the process of starting a new project of my own that will probably grow quite large, but I'm finding that there is a lot to do and a lot changing in the first few days/hours/weeks/the period up until the product is actually functioning in it's most basic form. Is there any point in me checking in each step of the process as I would with an existing project? I'm not breaking the project with changes I make since it isn't working yet. At the moment I've simply been using VCS as a backup at the end of each day, when I leave the computer. My first few commits were things like "Basic directory structure in place" and "DB tables created". How should I use a VCS when starting a new project?

    Read the article

  • Branching strategy for parallel development that won't be in the same release?

    - by Telastyn
    My team is working on a product, which for business reasons needs to be released on a regular schedule. An issue has arisen where we want to do development in parallel for the upcoming release, as well as the 'next' release. This is to become standard practice, so it's not as straightforward as cutting a feature branch for the new work. We'll continually have 2+ teams working on different releases of the same product. Is there an SCM best practice for this sort of arrangement?

    Read the article

  • Can I associate a github gist with an organization?

    - by yc01
    My team has a GitHub organization account. A lot of the work I do results in one-off scripts that we want to be able to have on our organization page, but that aren't big enough projects to justify their own repository. Is there any way to associates Gists with GitHub organization accounts? If not, what's the best way to 'check-in' or associate smaller scripts into Github's shared organizational repository?

    Read the article

  • Looking for best approach to create new projects for enviroment specifics files

    - by Ness
    ClearCase Question... Overview of requirements: There are 3 diff environments (DEV, TEST and PROD) which have a folder called 'common' that users across all envs. There are multiple servers in those 3 envs and we want to store their server environment specific configuration files in Clearcase. The executables files are different for each environment. Thus there will not be cross delivery require between dev/test/prod. Any thoughts on how we can approach this? Is keeping it simplest is the best approach here? One component to one vobs as (DEV_Serv1, TEST_Serv1, PROD_Serv1, Dev_Serv2, Test_Serv2 and etc)? OR Have multiple components VOB? One other thing is developers here like to use snapshots views.

    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 | 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66  | Next Page >