Search Results

Search found 7934 results on 318 pages for 'git gui'.

Page 80/318 | < Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >

• How to determine files that are subjected to filter via gitattributes when filter is executed?

  - by rasjani

  I have bunch of ruby scripts in a git repository and it seems to be really hard to enforce people to write properly indented code. I also have a small ruby script that formats to code to specific standard and now i would like to run that as a a filter script so that junk wont get committed into repository. echo "*.rb filter=rubyfilter" > .gitattributes echo "[filter \"rubyfilter\"]" >> .git/config echo " clean = /home/rasjani/bin/rbeauty" >> .git/config echo " smudge = /home/rasjani/bin/rbeauty" >> .git/config does the dirty trick git side but the ruby script should then process the files affected: how / where do i look those up from ?

  Read the article

• GIT vs. Perforce- Two VCS will enter... one will leave.

  - by Justin Bozonier

  So I'm in the process of getting GIT sold at work. First thing I need is to convince everyone that GIT is better at what they're already used to doing. We currently use Perforce. Anybody else go through a similar sale? Any good links/advice? One of the big wins is that we can worth with it disconnected from the network. Another win imo is the way adds/checkouts are handled. More points are welcome! Also we have about 10-20 devs total.

  Read the article

• gitk without X11 [closed]

  - by svnpenn

  It has been noted here that Tcl/Tk, and in turn gitk now require X11 under Cygwin. Having run it before and after this change it seems like extreme overkill. I use gitk very lightly, mostly sticking to simply command line git. How could I go about using gitk without X11, perhaps manually installing old version of Tcl/Tk? After some tinkering, I came up with this script that allows gitk without X11 #!/bin/sh # Requires Cygwin packages: git, make, mingw64-i686-gcc-core, wget # Install Tcl wget prdownloads.sf.net/tcl/tcl8.5.12-src.tar.gz tar xf tcl8.5.12-src.tar.gz cd tcl8.5.12/win ./configure --host i686-w64-mingw32 make install cd - # Install Tk wget prdownloads.sf.net/tcl/tk8.5.12-src.tar.gz tar xf tk8.5.12-src.tar.gz cd tk8.5.12/win ./configure --host i686-w64-mingw32 make install cd - # Install gitk cd /usr/local/bin wget raw.github.com/git/git/master/gitk-git/gitk chmod 700 gitk echo 'cygpath -m "$1" | xargs -I% wish85 % -- ${@:3}' > wish cd -

  Read the article

• Flaws in my PHP development setup - sharing sources causing lags

  - by Wiktor

  I have following development setup for my PHP projects: Working station running on Windows 7 with PhpStorm IDE. GIT for version controlling. CentOS on virtual machine (VirtualBox) with Apache and MySQL (copy of production server). So far, I've been sharing project's source folders between host and guest systems and it was working quite well only really slow. The reason behind this is that Apache was reading files from remote folder (mounted locally). After doing some research, I found out that this set up can be improved by using disk mapping (Samba) instead of folder sharing. So I did that change. I configured my PhpStorm to automatically deploy files to mapped drive. Everything works like a charm now, except for one problem - when I change branches I need to synchronize project's local folder with the one on mapped drive and that takes time, a lot of time (like branching in SVN). Is there another way to handle this than just working on files directly on mapped drive?

  Read the article

• Keeping up with upstream changes while adding small fixes or even major changes

  - by neo

  Often I need to apply some small fixes (to make them run on my environment) or even change some parts of the software (to tailor it to my needs) to software from outside. However this obviously creates problem with updating said software, even when it changes nothing related to my fix. It would be easier when the software provided integration for some kind of plugins but more often than not it doesn't. What would be an ideal workflow regarding that? Most of the projects are git repos I pulled from outside. How should I apply my changes so that I can update painlessly? You can assume that external changes are much more often and larger than my own ones, so reviewing each one of them won't be a solution.

  Read the article

• What is the best way to find a python google app engine coach?

  - by David Haddad

  i'm a software engineer and have been building Google App Engine apps with Python for about a year. I have a pretty good familiarity with the main concepts: web app framework, modeling, queues, memcache, django templates, etc. Where I think I'm lacking is in methodology. Architecting the app, using git for versioning, designing an writing unit tests. I'm totally convinced to incorporate these practices in my development style, and have started reading up on them. However I've learned that I'm a much faster learner when I have someone experienced to ask questions to and interact with. IRC channels and forums like stack overflow are great. But sometimes you want something more dynamic that produces results faster. So my question is how can a person find an experienced engineer that is familiar with the technologies he uses and that is willing to give them a couple of hours of Skype coaching sessions per week in return for an hourly fee...

  Read the article

• How do I push code to github on shutdown?

  - by Ezequiel

  I switch between working at home and the office, and sometimes, like today, I forget to run a git commit/push. (I find it easy to ignore the command line since I'm still kind of a beginner, there.) How can I make it so that when I shut down my Ubuntu OS, it will follow this process: Check my local code against the github server, executing the rest of this script only if I've made newer changes. Add all new files. Make commits with a basic default comment. Push all changed code to origin master. If anyone knows how to do this, it would be a major assist. Also, anyone know how to do it for Mac OSX? :D

  Read the article

• Is SVN out of style?

  - by jitbit

  It's been only several years since I migrated from Visual Source Safe to SVN. And SVN for me is still kinda "WOW! I can do so many things! SVN is so cool!" But many people around me keep saying "SVN? Really? Meh..." And there's so many of them that I'm worried. Should I move my team to Git / Mercurial or some other fancy thing? I know I sound ridiculous and the obvious answer would be "stay with what works for YOU". SVN does work for me... But every time I create a new project in my repository I keep asking myself - may be this was the time to move? So... Is SVN really that bad? Do I miss a huge opportunity by sticking with it?

  Read the article

• How can I create a launcher and also have it in the apps toolbar

  - by Michael Durrant

  I want an app icon for smart git. I can create one on my desktop with $ gnome-desktop-item-edit ~/ --create-new and selecting the smartgit.sh app. That works for an icon on the desktop. How can I move that icon / create a new one in my applications toolbar (so not just on the desktop)? In my case that is the Unity applications toolbar (which I've moved to the left). I've tried dragging and dropping it there but it didn't work. I can make it appear in the dash home by adding an entry this way New App doesn't appear in Unity dash but I still can't move it to be an app icon in the apps toolbar.

  Read the article

• Can I host my website through gitlab like you can with github pages?

  - by BenWatkinsArt

  I would love to use git to host my website, and would love a platform I can log into online to go along with it (something like Github). You would think in which case, that Github pages would be the perfect route for me, though I don't want to use Github pages. I would like to host this all on my own servers like you do with Github enterprise (but for free). I have found Gitlab and was wondering if there is anyway I can use Gitlab like Github pages. Is it possible?

  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

• SSH does not allow the use of a key with group readable permissions

  - by scjr

  I have a development git server that deploys to a live server when the live branch is pushed to. Every user has their own login and therefore the post-receive hook which does the live deployment is run under their own user. Because I don't want to have to maintain the users public keys as authorized keys on the remote live server I have made up a set of keys that 'belong's to the git system to add to remote live servers (In the post-receive hook I am using $GIT_SSH to set the private key with the -i option). My problem is that because of all the users might want to deploy to live, the git system's private key has to be at least group readable and SSH really doesn't like this. Here's a sample of the error: XXXX@XXXX /srv/git/identity % ssh -i id_rsa XXXXX@XXXXX @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ @ WARNING: UNPROTECTED PRIVATE KEY FILE! @ @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@ Permissions 0640 for 'id_rsa' are too open. It is required that your private key files are NOT accessible by others. This private key will be ignored. bad permissions: ignore key: id_rsa I've looked around expecting to find something in the way of forcing ssh to just go through with the connection but I've found nothing but people blindly saying that you just shouldn't allow access to anything but a single user.

  Read the article

• Use Windows/Mac MySQL GUI over SSH Tunnel

  - by Marcin

  I am working on a client's website and he has hosting through 1and1. They don't allow connecting directly to their mySQL server from anywhere. I can't for instance load up a mySQL GUI on windows and just connect and work on the databases, it says host not found. His hosting account on the other hand is given access to the mySQL server even though it is in a different location. Let's say these are the servers I'm working with: His main hosting: Address: thehost.com Username: joe His mySQL server: Address: mysqlserver.com Port: 3306 Database: thedata User: dbouser The main hosting account he has comes with SSH. So if I SSH into thehost.com on port 22 and then use the mysql command to connect to mysqlserver.com, it works. I have tried to set up SSH tunneling but the problem is that it's not the mySQL server that has SSH allowed, it's the main hosting. How do I set up SSH Tunneling on both a Mac and a Windows machine so that I can run any GUI I want and I will be able to connect to the mysqlserver.com server. All based on the information above that SSH access is to thehost.com only, and thehost.com itself can connect to mysqlserver.com.

  Read the article

• Tarballing without git metadata

  - by zaf

  My source tree contains several directories which are using git source control and I need to tarball the whole tree excluding any references to the git metadata or custom log files. I thought I'd have a go using a combo of find/egrep/xargs/tar but somehow the tar file contains the .git directories and the *.log files. This is what I have: find -type f . | egrep -v '\.git|\.log' | xargs tar rvf ~/app.tar Can someone explain my misunderstanding here? Why is tar processing the files that find and egrep are filtering? I'm open to other techniques as well.

  Read the article

• Regular expression for git repository

  - by runge

  What will be proper regular expression for git repositories? example link: [email protected]:someone/someproject.git so it will be like server can be url or ip Project can contain some other characters than alphanumeric like '-' I'm not sure what is the role of '/' any suggestions?

  Read the article

• free OCR with UI for correcting errors (for Windows)

  - by Hugh Allen

  I've used SimpleOCR, which has a nice GUI for correcting errors. Unfortunately it makes a lot of errors! (and suffers other bugs and limitations) Is there a free OCR program for Windows which has such a GUI and a low error rate? I want it to show the original (bitmap) word while I'm editing the OCRed word similar to what SimpleOCR does: Free is good. Open-source is better.

  Read the article

• How do I set up pairing email addresses?

  - by James A. Rosen

  Our team uses the Ruby gem hitch to manage pairing. You set it up with a group email address (e.g. [email protected]) and then tell it who is pairing: $ hitch james tiffany Hitch then sets your Git author configuration so that our commits look like commit 629dbd4739eaa91a720dd432c7a8e6e1a511cb2d Author: James and Tiffany <[email protected]> Date: Thu Oct 31 13:59:05 2013 -0700 Unfortunately, we've only been able to come up with two options: [email protected] doesn't exist. The downside is that if Travis CI tries to notify us that we broke the build, we don't see it. [email protected] does exist and forwards to all the developers. Now the downside is that everyone gets spammed with every broken build by every pair. We have too many possible pair to do any of the following: set up actual [email protected] email addresses or groups (n^2 email addresses) set up forwarding rules for [email protected] (n^2 forwarding rules) set up forwarding rules for [email protected] (n forwarding rules for each of n developers) Does anyone have a system that works for them?

  Read the article

• Best way to convert existing project to be open source in GitHub

  - by Tom

  I've been working on a personal closed source project for some time and would like to make it open source. I've never created my own open source project before so it will be a good learning experience. I have been using GitHub as source control, so once I've written some decent docs on how to use and develop for it etc, it should be as simple as switching the repo to be public right? I guess my main question is around licencing. I was thinking of going with Apache 2.0 licence just because it seems to be widely used. It requires the licence header to be attached to all the source files, but if I do that now then all the other commits in the past will have it missing. Does that mean some one could pull an earlier version and it wouldn't have a licence? Is it best to start a new repo with the initial commit containing all the code with licence headers? Or maybe is there some advanced Git functionality that allows me to apply the licence header to all existing commits some how? Cheers.

  Read the article

• Collaboration using github and testing the code

  - by wyred

  The procedure in my team is that we all commit our code to the same development branch. We have a test server that runs updated code from this branch so that we can test our code on the servers. The problem is that if we want to merge the development branch to the master branch in order to publish new features to our production servers, some features that may not have been ready will be applied to the production servers. So we're considering having each developer work on a feature/topic branch where each of them work on their own features and when it's ready, merge it into the development branch for testing, and then into the master branch. However, because our test server only pulls changes from the development branch, the developers are unable to test their features. While this is not a huge issue as they can test it on their local machine, the only problem I foresee is if we want to test callbacks from third-party services like sendgrid (where you specify a url for sendgrid to update you on the status of emails sent out). How to handle this problem? Note: We're not advanced git users. We use the Github app for MacOSX and Windows to commit our work.

  Read the article

• Versioning millions of files with distributed SCM

  - by C. Lawrence Wenham

  I'm looking into the feasibility of using off-the-shelf distributed SCMs such as Git or Mercurial to manage millions of XML files. Each file would be a commercial transaction, such as a purchase order, that would be updated perhaps 10 times during the lifecycle of the transaction until it is "done" and changes no more. And by "manage", I mean that the SCM would be used to not just version the files, but also to replicate them to other machines for redundancy and transfer of IP. Lets suppose, for the sake of example, that a goal is to provide good performance if it was handling the volume of orders that Amazon.com claimed to have at its peak in December 2010: about 150,000 orders per minute. We're expecting the system to be distributed over many servers in order to get reasonable performance. We're also planning to use solid-state drives exclusively. There is a reason why we don't want to use an RDBMS for primary storage, but it's a bit beyond the scope of this question. Does anyone have first-hand experience with the performance of distributed SCMs under such a load, and what strategies were used? Open-source preferred, since the final product is to be FOSS, too.

  Read the article

• Big project layout : adding new feature on multiple sub-projects

  - by Shiplu

  I want to know how to manage a big project with many components with version control management system. In my current project there are 4 major parts. Web Server Admin console Platform. The web and server part uses 2 libraries that I wrote. In total there are 5 git repositories and 1 mercurial repository. The project build script is in Platform repository. It automates the whole building process. The problem is when I add a new feature that affects multiple components I have to create branch for each of the affected repo. Implement the feature. Merge it back. My gut feeling is "something is wrong". So should I create a single repo and put all the components there? I think branching will be easier in that case. Or I just do what I am doing right now. In that case how do I solve this problem of creating branch on each repository?

  Read the article

• Branching strategy for frequent releases

  - by Technext

  We have very frequent releases and we use Git for version control. When i am mentioning about frequency, please assume it to include bug-fixes and feature release too. All releases are eventually merged into ‘mainline’. When a release is deployed on production and if a bug is identified, people start fixing the bug on the same branch from which the latest release was deployed on production. They do not create a new bug-fix branch for the same. I feel that’s not the right way to go for. There are several components and each component has a different owner, and thus, different perspective. Though I have not initiated talks with them, I am sure there will be a lot of resistance. Main issue that they might cite would be, “There’s a lot of work involved in creating and tracking branches especially when there are so frequent deployments on production. This will consume a lot of dev effort.” Do you think that fixing bug on the same branch from which release was done, a good idea? If yes, how do you manage it? Using tags? I know that best practices may not always be applicable due to several factors but still I would like to know what might be a good approach for branching in a scenario where releases/bug-fixes happen almost on a daily basis.

  Read the article

• We're Subversion Geeks and we want to know the benefits of Mercurial

  - by Matt

  Having read I'm a Subversion geek, why should I consider or not consider Mercurial or Git or any other DVCS. I have a related follow up question. I read that question and read the recommended links and videos and I see the benefits but I don't see the overall mindshift people are talking about. Our team is of 8-10 developers that work on one large code base consisting of 60 projects. We use Subversion and have a main trunk. When a developer starts a new Fogbugz case they create a svn branch, do the work on the branch and when they're done they merge back to the trunk. Occasionally they may stay on the branch for an extended time and merge the trunk to the branch to pick up the changes. When I watched Linus talk about people creating a branch and never doing it again, that's not us at all. We create probably 50-100 branches a week without issue. The biggest challenge is the merging but we've gotten pretty good at that as well. I tend to merge by fogbugz case & checkin rather than the entire root of the branch. We never work remotely and we never make branches off of branches. If you're the only one working in that section of the code base then the merge to the trunk goes smoothly. If someone else had modified the same section of code then the merge can get messy and you might need to do some surgery. Conflicts are conflicts, I don't see how any system could get it right most of the time unless if was smart enough to understand the code. After creating a branch the following checkout of 60k+ files takes some time but that would be an issue with any source control system we'd use. Is there some benefit of any DVCS that we're not seeing that would be of great help to us?

  Read the article

• github team workflow - to fork or not?

  - by aporat

  We're a small team of web developers currently using subversion but soon we're making a switch to github. I'm looking at different types of github workflows, and we're not sure if the whole forking concept in github for each developer is such a good idea for us. If we use forks, I understand each developer will have his own private remote & local repositories. I'm worried it will make pushing changesets hard and too complex. Also, my biggest concern is that it will force each developer to have 2 remotes: origin (which is the remote fork) and an upstream (which is used to "sync" changes from the main repository). Not sure if it's such a easy way to do things. This is similar to the workflow explained here: https://github.com/usm-data-analysis/usm-data-analysis.github.com/wiki/Git-workflow If we don't use forks, we can probably get by fine by using a central repo creating a branch for each task we're working on, and merge them into the development branch on the same repository. It means we won't be able to restrict merging of branches and might be a little messy to have many branches on the central repository. Any suggestions from teams who tried both workflow?

  Read the article

• Pulling in changes from a forked repo without a request on GitHub?

  - by Alec

  I'm new to the social coding community and don't know how to proceed properly in this situation: I've created a GitHub Repository a couple weeks ago. Someone forked the project and has made some small changes that have been on my to-do. I'm thrilled someone forked my project and took the time to add to it. I'd like to pull the changes into my own code, but have a couple of concerns. 1) I don't know how to pull in the changes via git from a forked repo. My understanding is that there is an easy way to merge the changes via a pull request, but it appears as though the forker has to issue that request? 2) Is it acceptable to pull in changes without a pull request? This relates to the first one. I'd put the code aside for a couple of weeks and come back to find that what I was going to work on next was done by someone else, and don't want to just copy their code without giving them credit in some way. Shouldn't there be a to pull the changes in even if they don't explicitly ask you to? What's the etiquette here I may be over thinking this, but thanks for your input in advance. I'm pretty new to the hacker community, but I want to do what I can to contribute!

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87  | Next Page >