Search Results

Search found 5564 results on 223 pages for 'git svn'.

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 98/223 | < Previous Page | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >

  • How do I store in subversion my customizations to a public open source project?

    - by Clyde
    Hi, I'm working on customizing a couple of open source projects in ways that are very much personalized -- i.e., not appropriate to send the patches back to the maintainers for the public. One of them is stored in CVS, one in SVN. I use SVN for my own work. The CVS project is fine. I check the tree in to my svn repository, including the CVS directories. I can commit all my changes, and still do a cvs update to stay up to date with bug fixes/features of the public project. How should I work on the svn project? Is there a 'best practice' or known procedure for this kind of scenario?

    Read the article

  • MSBuild: automate collecting of db migration scripts?

    - by P Dub
    Summary of environment. Asp.net web application (source stored in svn) sqlserver database. (Database schema (tables/sprocs) stored in svn) db version is synced with web application assembly version. (stored in table 'CurrentVersion') CI hudson server that checks out web app from repo and runs custom msbuild file to publish/package app. My msbuild script updates the assembly version of the web app (Major.Minor.Revision.Build) on each build. The 'Revision' is set to the currently checked out svn revision and the 'Build' to the hudson build number (incremented on each automated build). This way i can match the app to a specific trunk revision also get other build stats from the hudson build number. I'd like to automate the collecting of migration scripts (updated sprocs etc) to add to the zip package. I guess by comparing the svn revision of the db that has yet to be deployed to, to the revision being deployed, i can find what db files have changed in the trunk since the last deployment to that database/environment. This could easily be achieved by manually calling the svn diff -r REVNO:REVNO command to list changed .sql files. These files could then manually have to be added to the package. It would be great if this could be automated. Firstly i'd imagine I'll have to write a custom task to check the version of the db that has yet to be deployed to. After that I'm quite unsure. Does anyone have any suggestion on how this would be achieved through an msbuild task either existing or custom? Finally I'll have to autogen a script to add to the package that updates the database version table so as to be in sync with the application.

    Read the article

  • I need an IDE for typo3 core development in php

    - by Flugan
    Php in itself is difficult for IDEs because of the dynamic nature of the language. My current development environment is mostly netbeans against a local svn copy of the codebase setup in a local development webserver. The code is full text indexed by vistas search engine for almost instant searches. I do a lot of development directly against the main development server using a combination of tools. Putty to interact with the server and deploy by updating an svn checkout on the development server. Tortoise SVN locally to have a fairly rich SVN experience. Netbeans obviously have SVN integration. Most of the changes on the remote server is commited using the putty session. WinSCP to interact with the development server with norton commander like interface as well as the good putty integration. Finally my text editor for remote editing is notepad++ out of habit and because of some nice features and good price. What I'm really missing is good php editing. Because of the way typo3 works almost all objects are instanciated through make instance abstraction that either returns the base class or the customized class if the framework has been extended. I'm not looking for a magic editing package and would like to find an editor which can use annotations to specify the type of commonly used variables.

    Read the article

  • Can I automatically overwrite repository files using svn_load_dirs.pl or similiar?

    - by Andy Strang
    I am working with a legacy VSS repository which was transferred over to a new SVN repository a few months ago. In the meantime, before we go live with the SVN repository, we need to bring over all the changes that have happened on the VSS one between then and now. I was looking at different ways to do this which seem to be things such as: 1.) svn_load_dirs.pl then merge the files manually? 2.) svn import straight into the trunk and merge files manually 3.) checkout a working copy of my SVN repository, copy in the changed files which will overwrite some of the ones in my working copy then commit the changes. My question is, can any of these options be used (or any other options) to automate things so that I don't have to merge the files, and can instead just overwrite them? I think only Option 3 would do this but any help is appreciated.

    Read the article

  • Subversion: Change working directory's target repo

    - by Aiden Bell
    I know, other RCS are better, but... I have moved an SVN repository from file:///path/to/repo to http://host.name/svn/repo but there is a working directory (checkout out from file://) with changes that want commiting to the http location. How then, can I change the repo a working directory will commit to when issuing svn commit? I'd rather do that than checkout a new copy and sync changes locally. Also, handy to know for the future.

    Read the article

  • Is Subversion's 'Lazy Copy' still lazy when overwriting a previously deleted file?

    - by JW
    Is Subversion's 'Lazy Copy' still lazy when overwriting a previously deleted file? I store my externals in a separate folder for each version: i.e say for dojo I'd have: webroot\ scripts\ dojo-v-1.0.0\ dojo-v-1.1.0\ etc. By doing this, for me at least, I feel it makes it easier to switch over to a new version. By only adding each new version i am not really giving svn the history it needs to do lazy copies. So one tactic I have used is to svn copy over the old version over to where the new one will be then svn delete that whole folder then unpack my newer version into that place then svn add them The idea is to avoid having a massive amount of duplicated data in my repo. I hope svn is looking at the new files and saying, "hey, i already had this once, copied, then deleted...so i am only going to be lazy store the changes". That was my theory - but does that happen in practice? p.s. Yes I know an alternative is to set the 'externals properties on the folder' - but that's another question.

    Read the article

  • SVNKit: How to get the repository url from a local path?

    - by StackedCrooked
    I would like to implement a method that can get the svn revision number from the path where a SVN repository has been checked out. The method declaration would look something like this: long getRevisionNumber(String localPath) { ... } I'm trying to use SVNKit for this, but it seems to require an SVN URL to start with. Is there any way to start with a local path?

    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

  • 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

  • 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

  • Is version history really sacred or is it better to rebase?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've always agreed with Mercurial's mantra, however, now that Mercurial comes bundled with the rebase extension and it is a popular practice in git, I'm wondering if it could really be regarded as a "bad practice", or at least bad enough to avoid using. In any case, I'm aware of rebasing being dangerous after pushing. OTOH, I see the point of trying to package 5 commits in a single one to make it look niftier (specially at in a production branch), however, personally I think would be better to be able to see partial commits to a feature where some experimentation is done, even if it is not as nifty, but seeing something like "Tried to do it way X but it is not as optimal as Y after all, doing it Z taking Y as base" would IMHO have good value to those studying the codebase and follow the developers train of thought. My very opinionated (as in dumb, visceral, biased) point of view is that programmers like rebase to hide mistakes... and I don't think this is good for the project at all. So my question is: have you really found valuable to have such "organic commits" (i.e. untampered history) in practice?, or conversely, do you prefer to run into nifty well-packed commits and disregard the programmers' experimentation process?; whichever one you chose, why does that work for you? (having other team members to keep history, or alternatively, rebasing it).

    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

  • Coping with build order requirements in automated builds

    - by Derecho
    I have three Scala packages being built as separate sbt projects in separate repos with a dependency graph like this: M---->D ^ ^ | | +--+--+ ^ | S S is a service. M is a set of message classes shared between S and another service. D is a DAL used by S and the other service, and some of its model appears in the shared messages. If I make a breaking change to all three, and push them up to my Git repo, a build of S will be kicked off in Jenkins. The build will only be successful if, when S is pushed, M and D have already been pushed. Otherwise, Jenkins will find it doesn't have the right dependent package versions available. Even pushing them simultaneously wouldn't be enough -- the dependencies would have to be built and published before the dependent job was even started. Making the jobs dependent in Jenkins isn't enough, because that would just cause the previous version to be built, resulting in an artifact that doesn't have the needed version. Is there a way to set things up so that I don't have to remember to push things in the right order? The only way I can see it working is if there was a way that a build could go into a pending state if its dependencies weren't available yet. I feel like there's a simple solution I'm missing. Surely people deal with this a lot?

    Read the article

  • How can I switch an existing set of Subversion repositories to use ActiveDirectory?

    - by jpierson
    I have a set of private Subversion repositories on a Windows Server 2003 box which developers access via SVNServe over the svn:// protocol. Currently we have been using the authz and passwd files for each repository to control access however with the growing number of repositories and developers I'm considering switching to using their credentials from ActiveDirectory. We run in an all Microsoft shop and use IIS instead of Apache on all of our web servers so I would prefer to continue to use SVNServe if possible. Besides it being possible, I'm also concerned about how to migrate our repositories so that the history for the existing users map to the correct ActiveDirectory accounts. Keep in mind also that I'm not the network administrator and I'm not terrible familiar with ActiveDirectory so I'll probably have to go through some other people to get the changes made in ActiveDirectory if necessary. What are my options? UPDATE 1: It appears from the SVN documentation that by using SASL I should be able to get SVNServe to authenticate using ActiveDirectory. To clarify, the answer that I'm looking for is how to go about configuring SVNServe (if possible) to use ActiveDirectory for authentication and then how to modify an existing repository to remap existing svn users to their ActiveDirectory domain login accounts. UPDATE 2: It appears that the SASL support in SVNServe works off of a plugin model and the documentation only shows as an example. Looking at the Cyrus SASL Library it looks like a number of authentication "mechanisms" are supported but I'm not sure which one is to be used for ActiveDirectory support nor can I find any documentation about such matters. UPDATE 3: Ok, well it looks like in order to communication with ActiveDirectory I'm looking to use saslauthd instead of sasldb for the *auxprop_plugin* property. Unfortunately it appears that according to some posts (possibly outdated and inaccurate) saslauthd does not build on Windows and such endeavors are considered a work in progress. UPDATE 4: The lastest post I've found on this topic makes it sound as though the proper binaries () are available through the MIT Kerberos Library but it sounds like the author of this post on Nabble.com is still having issues getting things working. UPDATE 5: It looks like from the TortoiseSVN discussions and also this post on svn.haxx.se that even if saslgssapi.dll or whatever necessary binaries are available and configured on the Windows server that the clients will also need the same customization in order to work with these repositories. If this is true, we will only be able to get ActiveDirectory support from a windows client only if changes are made in these clients such as TortoiseSVN and CollabNet build of the client binaries to support such authentication schemes. Although thats what these posts suggest, this is contradictory from what I originally assumed from other reading in that being SASL compatible should require no changes on the client but instead only that the server be setup to handle the authentication mechanism. After reading a bit more carefully in the document about Cyrus SASL in Subversion section 5 states "1.5+ clients with Cyrus SASL support will be able to authenticate against 1.5+ servers with SASL enabled, provided at least one of the mechanisms supported by the server is also supported by the client." So clearly GSSAPI support (which I understand is required for Active Directory) must be available within the client and the server. I have to say, I'm learning way too much about the internals of how Subversion handles authentication than I ever wanted to and I juts simply want to get an answer about whether I can have Active Directory authentication support when using SVNServe on a Windows server and accessing this from Windows clients. According to the official documentation it seems that this is possible however you can see that the configuration is not trivial if even possible at all.

    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 | 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105  | Next Page >