Search Results

Search found 40037 results on 1602 pages for 'desktop version'.

Page 81/1602 | < Previous Page | 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88  | Next Page >

• How do I Integrate Production Database Hot Fixes into Shared Database Development model?

  - by TetonSig

  We are using SQL Source Control 3, SQL Compare, SQL Data Compare from RedGate, Mercurial repositories, TeamCity and a set of 4 environments including production. I am working on getting us to a dedicated environment per developer, but for at least the next 6 months we are stuck with a shared model. To summarize our current system, we have a DEV SQL server where developers first make changes/additions. They commit their changes through SQL Source Control to a local hgdev repository. When they execute an hg push to the main repository, TeamCity listens for that and then (among other things) pushes hgdev repository to hgrc. Another TeamCity process listens for that and does a pull from hgrc and deploys the latest to a QA SQL Server where regression and integration tests are run. When those are passed a push from hgrc to hgprod occurs. We do a compare of hgprod to our PREPROD SQL Server and generate deployment/rollback scripts for our production release. Separate from the above we have database Hot Fixes that will need to be applied in between releases. The process there is for our Operations team make changes on the PreProd database, and then after testing, to use SQL Source Control to commit their hot fix changes to hgprod from the PREPROD database, and then do a compare from hgprod to PRODUCTION, create deployment scripts and run them on PRODUCTION. If we were in a dedicated database per developer model, we could simply automatically push hgprod back to hgdev and merge in the hot fix change (through TeamCity monitoring for hgprod checkins) and then developers would pick it up and merge it to their local repository and database periodically. However, given that with a shared model the DEV database itself is the source of all changes, this won't work. Pushing hotfixes back to hgdev will show up in SQL Source Control as being different than DEV SQL Server and therefore we need to overwrite the reposistory with the "change" from the DEV SQL Server. My only workaround so far is to just have OPS assign a developer the hotfix ticket with a script attached and then we run their hotfixes against DEV ourselves to merge them back in. I'm not happy with that solution. Other than working faster to get to dedicated environment, are they other ways to keep this loop going automatically?

  Read the article

• The Best Websites for Downloading Cool Wallpapers

  - by Lori Kaufman

  Getting bored with your desktop wallpaper or the wallpaper on your mobile device? Because we use our PCs and mobile devices so much, it’s nice to have a choice of cool backgrounds to look at. We’ve collected links to some sites where you can download wallpapers for your PC or your phone. Not all the wallpapers are free, but there are plenty of free ones to provide a variety of cool backgrounds. HTG Explains: What is the Windows Page File and Should You Disable It? How To Get a Better Wireless Signal and Reduce Wireless Network Interference How To Troubleshoot Internet Connection Problems

  Read the article

• Examples of continuous integration workflow using git

  - by Andrew Barinov

  Can anyone provide a rough outline of their git workflow that complies with continuous integration. E.g. How do you branch? Do you fast forward commits to the master branch? I am primarily working with Rails as well as client and server side Javascript. If anyone can recommend a solid CI technology that's compatible with those, that'd be great. I've looked into Jenkins but would like to check out other good alternatives. To put some context into this, I am planning on transitioning from working as a single developer into working as part of the team. I'd like to start standardizing my own personal workflow so that I can onboard new devs quickly.

  Read the article

• How can I merge two SubVersion branches to one working copy without committing?

  - by Eric Belair

  My current SubVersion workflow is like so: The trunk is used to make small content changes and bug fixes to the main source code. Branches are used for adding/editing enhancements and projects. So, trunk changes are made, tested, committed and deployed pretty quickly. Whereas, enhancements and projects need additional user testing and approval. At time, I have two branches that need testing and approval at the same time. I don't want to merge to the trunk and commit until the changes are fully tested and approved. What I need to do is merge both branches to one working copy without any commits. I am using Tortoise SVN, and when I try to merge the second branch, I get an error message: Cannot merge into a working copy that has local modifications Is there a way that I can do this without committing either merge?

  Read the article

• How should I manage "reverting" a branch done with bookmarks in mercurial?

  - by Earlz

  I have an open source project on bitbucket. Recently, I've been working on an experimental branch which I (for whatever reason) didn't make an actual branch for. Instead what I did was use bookmarks. So I made two bookmarks at the same revision test --the new code I worked on that should now be abandoned(due to an experiment failure) main -- the stable old code that works I worked in test. I also pushed from test to my server, which ended up switching the tip tag to the new unstable code, when I really would've rather it stayed at main. I "switched" back to the main bookmark by doing a hg update main and then committing an insignificant change. So, I pushed this with hg push -f and now my source control is "correct" on the server. I know that there should be a cleaner way to "switch" branches. What should I do in the future for this kind of operation?

  Read the article

• Database source control

  - by Bojan Skrchevski

  Should database files(scripts etc.) be on source control? If so, what is the best method to keep it and update it there? Is there even a need for database files to be on source control since we can put it on a development server where everyone can use it and make changes to it if needed. But, then we can't get it back if someone messes it up. What approach is best used for databases on source-control?

  Read the article

• How can I convince cowboy programmers to use source control?

  - by P.Brian.Mackey

  UPDATE I work on a small team of devs, 4 guys. They have all used source control. Most of them can't stand source control and instead choose not to use it. I strongly believe source control is a necessary part of professional development. Several issues make it very difficult to convince them to use source control: The team is not used to using TFS. I've had 2 training sessions, but was only allotted 1 hour which is insufficient. Team members directly modify code on the server. This keeps code out of sync. Requiring comparison just to be sure you are working with the latest code. And complex merge problems arise Time estimates offered by developers exclude time required to fix any of these problems. So, if I say nono it will take 10x longer...I have to constantly explain these issues and risk myself because now management may perceive me as "slow". The physical files on the server differ in unknown ways over ~100 files. Merging requires knowledge of the project at hand and, therefore, developer cooperation which I am not able to obtain. Other projects are falling out of sync. Developers continue to have a distrust of source control and therefore compound the issue by not using source control. Developers argue that using source control is wasteful because merging is error prone and difficult. This is a difficult point to argue, because when source control is being so badly mis-used and source control continually bypassed, it is error prone indeed. Therefore, the evidence "speaks for itself" in their view. Developers argue that directly modifying server code, bypassing TFS saves time. This is also difficult to argue. Because the merge required to synchronize the code to start with is time consuming. Multiply this by the 10+ projects we manage. Permanent files are often stored in the same directory as the web project. So publishing (full publish) erases these files that are not in source control. This also drives distrust for source control. Because "publishing breaks the project". Fixing this (moving stored files out of the solution subfolders) takes a great deal of time and debugging as these locations are not set in web.config and often exist across multiple code points. So, the culture persists itself. Bad practice begets more bad practice. Bad solutions drive new hacks to "fix" much deeper, much more time consuming problems. Servers, hard drive space are extremely difficult to come by. Yet, user expectations are rising. What can be done in this situation?

  Read the article

• TortoiseSVN post-commit.bat doesn't work [migrated]

  - by user565739

  I am using TortoiseSVN on Windows 7 x64. I tried to put a post-commit.bat in the hooks folder of a repository, but it doesn't work at all. So I tried to put a pre-commit.bat (the content is exact the same as post-commit.bat) in hooks, and it worked fine. This is very strange. The .bat file is very simple, I just tried with: @echo off setlocal set REPOS=%1 set TXN=%2 xcopy C:\a C:\b\ /S /F exit 0 Anyone makes post-commit work with TortoiseSVN?

  Read the article

• Are there advantages to using a DVCS for a solo developer?

  - by SnOrfus

  Right now, I use visual svn on my server, and have ankhsvn/tortoise on my personal machine. It works fine enough, and I don't have to change, but if I can see some benefits of using a DVCS, then I might give it a go. However, if there's no point or difference using it without other people, then I won't bother. So again, I ask, are there any benefits to using a DVCS when you're the only developer?

  Read the article

• Github Organization Repositories, Issues, Multiple Developers, and Forking - Best Workflow Practices

  - by Jim Rubenstein

  A weird title, yes, but I've got a bit of ground to cover I think. We have an organization account on github with private repositories. We want to use github's native issues/pull-requests features (pull requests are basically exactly what we want as far as code reviews and feature discussions). We found the tool hub by defunkt which has a cool little feature of being able to convert an existing issue to a pull request, and automatically associate your current branch with it. I'm wondering if it is best practice to have each developer in the organization fork the organization's repository to do their feature work/bug fixes/etc. This seems like a pretty solid work flow (as, it's basically what every open source project on github does) but we want to be sure that we can track issues and pull requests from ONE source, the organization's repository. So I have a few questions: Is a fork-per-developer approach appropriate in this case? It seems like it could be a little overkill. I'm not sure that we need a fork for every developer, unless we introduce developers who don't have direct push access and need all their code reviewed. In which case, we would want to institute a policy like that, for those developers only. So, which is better? All developers in a single repository, or a fork for everyone? Does anyone have experience with the hub tool, specifically the pull-request feature? If we do a fork-per-developer (or even for less-privileged devs) will the pull-request feature of hub operate on the pull requests from the upstream master repository (the organization's repository?) or does it have different behavior? EDIT I did some testing with issues, forks, and pull requests and found that. If you create an issue on your organization's repository, then fork the repository from your organization to your own github account, do some changes, merge to your fork's master branch. When you try to run hub -i <issue #> you get an error, User is not authorized to modify the issue. So, apparently that work flow won't work.

  Read the article

• Installing gdm on headless Server Edition

  - by Andrew Koester

  I have Ubuntu Server running on a headless box, which is right now, almost entirely doing only software RAID and feels a little underused. I'd like to get into using Ubuntu as a desktop a little more. What do I need to do (install/etc.) to get Gnome while keeping the box itself headless? I'm not sure which packages to install or which steps to take. I figure I'll just use X over the network (Xming or the like) but something like NX might work.

  Read the article

• Managing Eclipse projects in source control

  - by Matt Phillips

  I've been using eclipse for a long time to do development. One of the problems I've come across when working on other people's projects is if they come from source control, some of the eclipse project files "default.properties" and other xml config files are missing. Its usually a big pain in the butt to get the project running in eclipse. I understand the reasoning to not have certain files tracked because they may be full of specific stuff to a certain eclipse install. How do all of you manage that?

  Read the article

• When should I make the first commit to source control?

  - by Kendall Frey

  I'm never sure when a project is far enough along to first commit to source control. I tend to put off committing until the project is 'framework-complete' and primarily commit features from then on. (I haven't done any personal projects large enough to have a core framework too big for this.) I have a feeling this isn't best practice, though I'm not sure what all could go wrong. Let's say, for example, I have a project which consists of a single code file. It will take about 10 lines of boilerplate code, and 100 lines to get the project working with extremely basic functionality (1 or 2 features). Should I first check in: The empty file? The boilerplate code? The first features? At some other point? Also, what are the reasons to check in at a specific point?

  Read the article

• How to setup NX server and client?

  - by javanoob

  I installed NX server on my desktop and able to run it successfully following this tutorial: http://michigantelephone.wordpress.com/2007/10/15/how-to-install-nx-server-and-client-under-ubuntukubuntu-linux/ When i run the command sudo /usr/NX/bin/nxserver –status I am seeing the following output : NX 900 Connecting to server .. NX 110 NX Server is running. NX 999 Bye. It means i have setup NX server correctly.. But on other machine when i open NX client it is asking for hostname..what name should i give there? Every tutorial is explaining about how to install and start NX server but not about how to connect to the server from client.. Could you guys please help me? Thanks in Advance Deter

  Read the article

• Peaceful Alpine River on a Sunny Day [Wallpaper]

  - by Asian Angel

  Lull [DesktopNexus] Latest Features How-To Geek ETC How to Get Amazing Color from Photos in Photoshop, GIMP, and Paint.NET Learn To Adjust Contrast Like a Pro in Photoshop, GIMP, and Paint.NET Have You Ever Wondered How Your Operating System Got Its Name? Should You Delete Windows 7 Service Pack Backup Files to Save Space? What Can Super Mario Teach Us About Graphics Technology? Windows 7 Service Pack 1 is Released: But Should You Install It? Peaceful Alpine River on a Sunny Day [Wallpaper] Fast Society Creates Mini and Mobile Temporary Social Networks Page Zipper Unpacks Multi-Page Articles for Single-Page Display Minty Bug: Build an FM Bug Inside a Mint Container Get the MakeUseOf eBook Guide to Hacker Proofing Your PC Sync Your Windows Computer with Your Ubuntu One Account [Desktop Client]

  Read the article

• How to show context menu when right-click released?

  - by Kev

  I'm using Ubuntu 10.04. When I right-click, menu popup too quickly, and the first menu item is clicked. If I right-click in desktop, it create a new folder sometime. If I right-click in terminal, it open a new terminal sometime. ... Is there some way to delay context menu? Or how can I offset context menu a little bit pixels to the right-bottom direction? (like firefox) Or how can I config Gnome to popup menu when right-mouse released? (like windows xp)

  Read the article

• How and where do you store your private work/sourcecode?

  - by Amir Rezaei

  I have worked as a developer for over 10 years now. During that time I have had my own small projects where I have developed tools, applications and games. I have not found any robust solution to store my work. It’s always fun to get back to your code and see how you did before and how you would do it now. It’s just work that is unfortunate to lose. There are SVN solution such as Google’s Project Hosting. However I’m not interested in sharing my code or making it open source. Currently I’m hosting my own SVN server. So here comes my question: How and where do you store your private work/sourcecode? Requirements: Sourcecode versioning Backup Prefers free Edit: Remote access Edit: I have used Dropbox + TrueCrypt + SVN. Unfortunately you are limited to 5gb.

  Read the article

• Download the Mountain Views from Romania Theme for Windows 7 and 8

  - by Asian Angel

  Are you ready to add some serene and beautiful mountain scenery to your desktop? Then you will definitely want to grab a copy of the Mountain Views from Romania Theme for Windows 7 and 8. The theme comes with five wonderful images from photographer Mihai Despan to add a peaceful mood to your favorite computer. Special Note: The photos in the theme do not contain the black strip shown in the image above. Those were ‘added’ during the image editing process for our post. Uncovering Artists Through Windows Themes – Mihai Despan [7 Tutorials] Why Enabling “Do Not Track” Doesn’t Stop You From Being Tracked HTG Explains: What is the Windows Page File and Should You Disable It? How To Get a Better Wireless Signal and Reduce Wireless Network Interference

  Read the article

• Kubuntu login problem

  - by Balázs Mária Németh

  I have a problem when trying to login to my Kubuntu 10.10. The login screen shows up, then I type my password, a blank screen is shown with my desktop background picture and then throws me back on the login screen. if I choose to login from console, I can do that, and by typing startx I can log in just fine but in the end I cannot shutdown the computer from the k menu nor will my settings remembered for the next time I log back. I have my home directory mounted from a different partition but I tried to create a new user account and I could log in without any kind of problem. The home directory is not encrypted, at least not to my knowledge. Some log files: Xorg.0.log dmesg.out kdm.log xsession.errors

  Read the article

• Kinetic Scroll in Maverick

  - by Shoaib

  I have Sony VAIO FW 230J laptop. I was using Lucid and upgraded my system to Maverick beta in September 2010. Although there were few issues with beta release on my system although I did not felt myself in any deadlock. The most notable experience on my ubuntu was the smooth and kinetic scrolling and very sensitive touch pad experience with finer control that was oddly normal in previous releases and even on windows 7 currently. Definitely this release of ubuntu is improved for touch UI experience. I believe that this is magic of 10.10. For my official system I waited until the final release was out. After installing (upgrading) official system to Maverick I am not feeling the same smooth and kinetic scroll experience. My laptop has Graphics: Intel DMA-X4500MHD while my official desktop has Graphics: Intel DMA-X4500HD Do I need to install or update some software package to have similar kinetic scroll experience?

  Read the article

• Should my colleagues review each others code from source control system?

  - by Daniel Excinsky

  Hi everybody. So that's my story: one of my colleagues uses to review all the code, hosted to revision system. I'm not speaking about adequate review of changes in parts that he belongs to. He watches the code file to file, line to line. Every new file and every modified. I feel just like being spied on! My guess is that if code was already hosted to control system, you should trust it as workable at least. My question is, maybe I'm just too paranoiac and practice of reviewing each others code is good? P.S: We're team of only three developers, and I fear that if there will be more of us, colleague just won't have time to review all the the code we'll write.

  Read the article

• How can I best manage making open source code releases from my company's confidential research code?

  - by DeveloperDon

  My company (let's call them Acme Technology) has a library of approximately one thousand source files that originally came from its Acme Labs research group, incubated in a development group for a couple years, and has more recently been provided to a handful of customers under non-disclosure. Acme is getting ready to release perhaps 75% of the code to the open source community. The other 25% would be released later, but for now, is either not ready for customer use or contains code related to future innovations they need to keep out of the hands of competitors. The code is presently formatted with #ifdefs that permit the same code base to work with the pre-production platforms that will be available to university researchers and a much wider range of commercial customers once it goes to open source, while at the same time being available for experimentation and prototyping and forward compatibility testing with the future platform. Keeping a single code base is considered essential for the economics (and sanity) of my group who would have a tough time maintaining two copies in parallel. Files in our current base look something like this: > // Copyright 2012 (C) Acme Technology, All Rights Reserved. > // Very large, often varied and restrictive copyright license in English and French, > // sometimes also embedded in make files and shell scripts with varied > // comment styles. > > > ... Usual header stuff... > > void initTechnologyLibrary() { > nuiInterface(on); > #ifdef UNDER_RESEARCH > holographicVisualization(on); > #endif > } And we would like to convert them to something like: > // GPL Copyright (C) Acme Technology Labs 2012, Some rights reserved. > // Acme appreciates your interest in its technology, please contact [email protected] > // for technical support, and www.acme.com/emergingTech for updates and RSS feed. > > ... Usual header stuff... > > void initTechnologyLibrary() { > nuiInterface(on); > } Is there a tool, parse library, or popular script that can replace the copyright and strip out not just #ifdefs, but variations like #if defined(UNDER_RESEARCH), etc.? The code is presently in Git and would likely be hosted somewhere that uses Git. Would there be a way to safely link repositories together so we can efficiently reintegrate our improvements with the open source versions? Advice about other pitfalls is welcome.

  Read the article

• How can I fix 'no wubildr' error in WUBI on Windows 7?

  - by Austin

  Good Evening All, I just got my HP Laptop Back from the factory and then I tried to install Ubuntu. It got through the whole installation, however, when I restarted and chose Ubuntu a quick screen flashes that says: Try (hd0,0) NTFS5: no wubildr Try (hd0,1) NTFS5: Then it quickly goes to the Boot Loader which I am presented with: Windows 7 (loader) (on /dev/sda1) Windows Vista (loader) (on /dev/sda2) Windows Vista (loader) (on /dev/sda3) Of course if I click Win 7 it'll go to the main screen to choose between Win 7 or Ubuntu, if I choose Vista, it'll come with an error of sorts. The strange thing is, I looked in my C:/ Drive and I see wubildr and wubilder.mbr Idk if it makes a difference but I am running a 64-bit processor. Installed the 64-bit desktop version and am presented with ultra-fail. I've gone to: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?s=4d54a8d3760f6fe805156524b7ab9acf&t=798283&page=1 But have had no luck.

  Read the article

• HG: fork web app project to separate API code from app code

  - by cs_brandt

  I have a web app thats been in active development for about 8 months now and its becoming apparent that the project has a need to maintain a separation between app specific code and our OO Javascript API. What I would like to do is have another repository with the following general structure of the js API code. repo_name | +---build | +---build_tools | +---doc | +---src | +---js Of course this structure is different from the original web app directory structure. If I make changes to this new repository how could I pull in those changes to the web app repository without unintentionally removing files or modifying the directory structure of the web app repository?

  Read the article

• Is there an established or defined best practice for source control branching between development and production builds?

  - by Matthew Patrick Cashatt

  Thanks for looking. I struggled in how to phrase my question, so let me give an example in hopes of making more clear what I am after: I currently work on a dev team responsible for maintaining and adding features to a web application. We have a development server and we use source control (TFS). Each day everyone checks in their code and when the code (running on the dev server) passes our QA/QC program, it goes to production. Recently, however, we had a bug in production which required an immediate production fix. The problem was that several of us developers had code checked in that was not ready for production so we had to either quickly complete and QA the code, or roll back everything, undo pending changes, etc. In other words, it was a mess. This made me wonder: Is there an established design pattern that prevents this type of scenario. It seems like there must be some "textbook" answer to this, but I am unsure what that would be. Perhaps a development branch of the code and a "release-ready" or production branch of the code?

  Read the article

< Previous Page | 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88  | Next Page >