Search Results

Search found 2823 results on 113 pages for 'perforce branch spec'.

Page 1/113 | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

  • Branch view for a file that has been split into multiple files

    - by ScottJ
    I have a large source file in Perforce that has been split up into several smaller files in a branch. I want to create a branch view that can handle this, but perforce (2009.1) only sees the last of the multiple files. For example, I created: p4 integrate //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/huge_file.c Later I split the huge file into smaller ones: p4 integrate //depot/new/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_one.c p4 integrate //depot/new/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_two.c p4 integrate //depot/new/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_three.c Then edit each of those (including //depot/new/huge_file.c) and submit. Now I make changes to //depot/original/huge_file.c and I want to integrate those changes to //depot/new. If I do this manually, it works fine: p4 integrate //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/huge_file.c p4 integrate //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_one.c p4 integrate //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_two.c p4 integrate //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_three.c But I don't want to do that every time I integrate -- this kind of thing belongs in a branch view. Unfortunately if the branch view includes the same source file multiple times, the subsequent lines override the earlier ones. How can I create a branch view like this: //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/huge_file.c //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_one.c //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_two.c //depot/original/huge_file.c //depot/new/small_file_three.c When I integrate using this branch spec, I get only small_file_three.c integrated.

    Read the article

  • Is Perforce as good as merging as DVCSs?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've heard that Perforce is very good at merging, I'm guessing this has to do with that it tracks changes in the form of changelists where you can add differences across several files in a single blow. I think this implies Perforce gathers more metadata and therefore has more information to do smarter merging (at least smarter than Subversion, being Perforce centralized). Since this is similar to how Mercurial and Git handle changes (I know DVCSs track content rather than files), I was wondering if somebody knew what were the subtle differences that makes Perforce better or worse than a DVCS like Mercurial or Git.

    Read the article

  • Is Perforce as good at merging as DVCSs?

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've heard that Perforce is very good at merging, I'm guessing this has to do with that it tracks changes in the form of changelists where you can add differences across several files in a single blow. I think this implies Perforce gathers more metadata and therefore has more information to do smarter merging (at least smarter than Subversion, being Perforce centralized). Since this is similar to how Mercurial and Git handle changes (I know DVCSs track content rather than files), I was wondering if somebody knew what were the subtle differences that makes Perforce better or worse than a DVCS like Mercurial or Git.

    Read the article

  • SVN Working Copy to Different Branch Merge Without Commit to Working Copy Branch

    - by Q Boiler
    If a working copy (local copy) was created from a branch, lets call it A. Coding was done in branch A, but branch A was "Closed" to commits, and branch b was opened. How do I merge my working copy changes into Branch B and commit to branch B, without commiting my changes to branch A first. Trunk - branch A. I checked out branch A and made changes. Branch A was closed to commits. New Branch created from branch A. branch A - branch B. I would like to commit my working copy changes (currently pointing at Branch A into branch B without commiting to Branch A)

    Read the article

  • To branch or not to branch?

    - by Idsa
    Till recently my development workflow was the following: Get the feature from product owner Make a branch (if feature is more than 1 day) Implement it in a branch Merge changes from main branch to my branch (to reduce conflicts during backward merging) Merge my branch back to main branch Sometimes there were problems with merging, but in general I liked it. But recently I see more and more followers of idea to not make branches as it makes more difficult to practice continuous integration, continuous delivery, etc. And it sounds especially funny from people with distributed VCS background who were talking so much about great merging implementations of Git, Mercurial, etc. So the question is should we use branches nowadays?

    Read the article

  • Mercurial branching a branch doesn't display right in hg serve or hg view

    - by Mystic
    I've been doing some development on a branch and realized that before it could be complete something else need to be done first. I decided that I would branch my current branch and do the requiste changes in that branch then merge them back together and then merge my working branch into default. Basically I expected this: | | + requiste work branch commit. | |/ | + working branch commit |/ +Default branch commit and in the end what I expect to do is this: + Merge into defualt |\ | + Merge requisite work into working branch | | \ | | + requiste work branch commit. | |/ | + working branch commit |/ +Default branch commit What I'm getting in both hg view and hg serve is this: | + requiste work branch commit. | | | + working branch commit |/ +Default branch commit However, when I look at the commit log "requiste work branch commit" is marked as a part of a different branch. Am I doing something wrong? Is this a bug in hg view and hg serve? Anyone experienced this before?

    Read the article

  • Developing a TCK: Spec Lead Call for Spec Leads 20 December

    - by Heather VanCura
    The JCP Program will be hosting a Spec Lead call on 20 December on the topic of developing a Technology Compatibility Kit (TCK).  A Technology Compatibility Kit is a required output of a JSR at Final Release, along with the Specification and Reference Implementation (RI).   The TCK must test all aspects of a specification that impact how compatible an implementation of that specification would be, such as the public API and all mandatory elements of the specification. The Reference Implementation is required to pass the TCK. A vendor's implementation of a specification is only considered compatible if the implementation passes the TCK fully and completely.  The TCK is used to test implementations of the Final Specification to make sure that they are fully compatible. The call will be recorded and posted on the JCP.org multimedia page along with any related materials.   Invitation details for the online meeting:Topic: SL Call: Developing a TCK Date: Thursday, December 20, 2012 Time: 9:30 am, Pacific Standard Time (San Francisco, GMT-08:00) Meeting Number: 804 390 892 Meeting Password: 2222 ------------------------------------------------------- To join the audio conference -------------------------------------------------------     +1 (866) 682-4770 (US)     Conference code: 945-4597    Security code: 52775 ("JCPSL" on your phone handset)     For global access numbers see http://www.intercall.com/oracle/access_numbers.htm         Or +1 (408) 774-4073

    Read the article

  • Commit changes to a different branch than the currently checked out branch with subversion

    - by Paul Alexander
    I've been working on code checked out from the development line and discovered that the changes made might be breaking changes and need to be moved to an experimental branch before committing to the main dev tree. However, I don't have the experimental branch checked out and I don't want to loose the changes that have already been made. Is there a way to commit the changes in the working folder to a different branch than originally checked out?

    Read the article

  • Git: What is a tracking branch?

    - by jerhinesmith
    Can someone explain a "tracking branch" as it applies to git? Here's the definition from git-scm.com: A 'tracking branch' in Git is a local branch that is connected to a remote branch. When you push and pull on that branch, it automatically pushes and pulls to the remote branch that it is connected with. Use this if you always pull from the same upstream branch into the new branch, and if you don't want to use "git pull" explicitly. Unfortunately, being new to git and coming from SVN, that definition makes absolutely no sense to me. I'm reading through "The Pragmatic Guide to Git" (great book, by the way), and they seem to suggest that tracking branches are a good thing and that after creating your first remote (origin, in this case), you should set up your master branch to be a tracking branch, but it unfortunately doesn't cover why a tracking branch is a good thing or what benefits you get by setting up your master branch to be a tracking branch of your origin repository. Can someone please enlighten me (in English)?

    Read the article

  • Why can Perforce be a better version control system? [closed]

    - by dukeofgaming
    I've seen some people love and some loathe Perforce. As users or administrators with experience with other version control systems (free cookie to the ones with DVCS experience [git, Mercurial]), what is the main reason/feature that makes you love Perforce over other version control systems? Edit: No, I don't sell Perforce... this is just part of my ongoing research to pitch DVCS at my company (see my question history)

    Read the article

  • Simple Branching and Merging with SVN

    Its a good idea not to do too much work without checking something into source control.  By too much work I mean typically on the order of a couple of hours at most, and certainly its a good practice to check in anything you have before you leave the office for the day.  But what if your changes break the build (on the build server you do have a build server dont you?) or would cause problems for others on your team if they get the latest code?  The solution with Subversion is branching and merging (incidentally, if youre using Microsoft Visual Studio Team System, you can shelve your changes and share shelvesets with others, which accomplishes many of the same things as branching and merging, but is a bit simpler to do). Getting Started Im going to assume you have Subversion installed along with the nearly ubiquitous client, TortoiseSVN.  See my previous post on installing SVN server if you want to get it set up real quick (you can put it on your workstation/laptop just to learn how it works easily enough). Overview When you know you are going to be working on something that you wont be able to check in quickly, its a good idea to start a branch.  Its also perfectly fine to create the branch after-the-fact (have you ever started something thinking it would be an hour and 4 hours later realized you were nowhere near done?).  In any event, the first thing you need to do is create a branch.  A branch is simply a copy of the current trunk (a typical subversion setup has root directories called trunk, tags, and branches its a good idea to keep this and to put your branches in the branches folder).  Once you have a new branch, you need to switch your working copy so that it is bound to your branch.  As you work,  you may want to merge in changes that are happening in the trunk to your branch, and ultimately when you are done youll want to merge your branch back into the trunk.  When done, you can delete your branch (or not, but it may add clutter).  To sum up: Create a new branch Switch your local working copy to the new branch Develop in the branch (commit changes, etc.) Merge changes from trunk into your branch Merge changes from branch into trunk Delete the branch Create a new branch From the root of your repository, right-click and select TortoiseSVN > Branch/tag as shown at right (click to enlarge).  This will bring up the Copy (Branch / Tag) interface.  By default the From WC at URL: should be pointing at the trunk of your repository.  I recommend (after ensuring that you have the latest version) that you choose to make the copy from the HEAD revision in the repository (the first radio button).  In the To URL: textbox, you should change the URL from /trunk to /branches/NAME_OF_BRANCH.  You can name the branch anything you like, but its often useful to give it your name (if its just for your use) or some useful information (such as a datestamp or a bug/issue ID from that it relates to, or perhaps just the name of the feature you are adding. When youre done with that, enter in a log message for your new branch.  If you want to immediately switch your local working copy to the new branch/tag, check the box at the bottom of the dialog (Switch working copy to new branch/tag).  You can see an example at right. Assuming everything works, you should very quickly see a window telling you the Copy finished, like the one shown below: Switch Local Working Copy to New Branch If you followed the instructions above and checked the box when you created your branch, you dont need to do this step.  However, if you have a branch that already exists and you would like to switch over to working on it, you can do so by using the Switch command.  Youll find it in the explorer context menu under TortoiseSVN > Switch: This brings up a dialog that shows you your current binding, and lets you enter in a new URL to switch to: In the screenshot above, you can see that Im currently bound to a branch, and so I could switch back to the trunk or to another branch.  If youre not sure what to enter here, you can click the [] next to the URL textbox to explore your repository and find the appropriate root URL to use.  Also, the dropdown will show you URLs that might be a good fit (such as the trunk of the current repository). Develop in the Branch Once you have created a branch and switched your working copy to use it,  you can make changes and Commit them as usual.  Your commits are now going into the branch, so they wont impact other users or the build server that are working off of the trunk (or their own branches).  In theory you can keep on doing this forever, but practically its a good idea to periodically merge the trunk into your branch, and/or keep your branches short-lived and merge them back into the trunk before they get too far out of sync. Merge Changes from Trunk into your Branch Once you have been working in a branch for a little while, change to the trunk will have occurred that youll want to merge into your branch.  Its much safer and easier to integrate changes in small increments than to wait for weeks or months and then try to merge in two very different codebases.  To perform the merge, simply go to the root of your branch working copy and right click, select TortoiseSVN->Merge.  Youll be presented with this dialog: In this case you want to leave the default setting, Merge a range of revisions.  Click Next.  Now choose the URL to merge from.  You should select the trunk of your current repository (which should be in the dropdownlist, or you can click the [] to browse your repository for the correct URL).  You can leave everything else blank since you want to merge everything: Click Next.  Again you can leave the default settings.  If you want to do something more granular than everything in the trunk, you can select a different Merge depth, to include merging just one item in the tree.  You can also perform a Test merge to see what changes will take place before you click Merge (which is often a good idea).  Heres what the dialog should look like before you click Merge: After clicking Merge (or Test merge) you should see a confirmation like this (it will say Test Only in the title if you click Test merge): Now you should build your solution, run all of your tests, and verify that your branch still works the way it should, given the updates that youve just integrated from the trunk.  Once everything works, Commit your changes, and then continue with your work on the branch.  Note that until you commit, nothing has actually changed in your branch on the server.  Other team members who may also be working in this branch wont be impacted, etc.  The Merge is purely a client-side operation until you perform a Commit. In a more real-world scenario, you may have conflicts.  When you do, youll be presented with a dialog like this one: Its up to you which option you want to go with.  The more frequently you Merge, the fewer of these youll have to deal with.  Also, be very sure that youre merging the right folders together.  If you try and merge your trunk with some subfolder in your branchs structure, youll end up with all kinds of conflicts and problems.  Fortunately, theyre only on your working copy (unless you commit them!) but if you see something like that, be sure to doublecheck your URL and your local file location. Merge Your Branch Back Into Trunk When youre done working in your branch, its time to pull it back into the trunk.  The first thing you should do is follow the previous steps instructions for merging the latest from the trunk into your branch.  This lets you ensure that what you have in your branch works correctly with the current trunk.  Once youve done that and committed your changes to your branch, youre ready to proceed with this step. Once youre confident your branch is good to go, you should go to its root folder and select TortoiseSVN->Merge (as above) from the explorer right-click menu.  This time, select Reintegrate a branch as shown below: Click Next.  Youll want it to merge with the trunk, which should be the default: Click Next. Leave the default settings: Click Test merge to see a test, and then if all looks good, click Merge.  Note that if you havent checked in your working copy changes, youll see something like this: If on the other hand things are successful: After this step, its likely you are finished working in your branch.  Dont forget to use the ToroiseSVN->Switch command to change your working copy back to the trunk. Delete the Branch You dont have to delete the branch, but over time your branches area of your repository will get cluttered, and in any event if theyre not actively being worked on the branches are just taking up space and adding to later confusion.  Keeping your branches limited to things youre actively working on is simply a good habit to get into, just like making sure your codebase itself remains tidy and not filled with old commented out bits of code. To delete the branch after youre finished with it, the simplest thing to do is choose TortoiseSVN->Repo Browser.  From there, assuming you did this from your branch, it should already be highlighted.  In any event, navigate to your branch in the treeview on the left, and then right-click and select Delete.  Enter a log message if youd like: Click OK, and its gone.  Dont be too afraid of this, though.  You can still get to the files by viewing the log for branches, and selecting a previous revision (anything before the delete action): If for some reason you needed something that was previously in this branch, you could easily get back to any changeset you checked in, so you should have absolutely no fear when it comes to deleting branches youre done with.   Resources If youre using Eclipse, theres a nice write-up of the steps required by Zach Cox that I found helpful here. Did you know that DotNetSlackers also publishes .net articles written by top known .net Authors? We already have over 80 articles in several categories including Silverlight. Take a look: here.

    Read the article

  • Updating files with a Perforce trigger before submit [migrated]

    - by phantom-99w
    I understand that this question has, in essence, already been asked, but that question did not have an unequivocal answer, so please bear with me. Background: In my company, we use Perforce submission numbers as part of our versioning. Regardless of whether this is a correct method or not, that is how things are. Currently, many developers do separate submissions for code and documentation: first the code and then the documentation to update the client-facing docs with what the new version numbers should be. I would like to streamline this process. My thoughts are as follows: create a Perforce trigger (which runs on the server side) which scans the submitted documentation files (such as .txt) for a unique term (such as #####PERFORCE##CHANGELIST##NUMBER###ROFL###LOL###WHATEVER#####) and then replaces it with the value of what the change list would be when submitted. I already know how to determine this value. What I cannot figure out, is how or where to update the files. I have already determined that using the change-content trigger (whether possible or not), which "fire[s] after changelist creation and file transfer, but prior to committing the submit to the database", is the way to go. At this point the files need to exist somewhere on the server. How do I determine the (temporary?) location of these files from within, say, a Python script so that I can update or sed to replace the placeholder value with the intended value? The online documentation for Perforce which I have found so far have not been very explicit on whether this is possible or how the mechanics of a submission at this stage would work.

    Read the article

  • Git-svn branch hoses dcommit when using an odd branch structure

    - by Chuck Vose
    I had a boss, past-tense, who decided to put svn branches in the same folder as trunk. Normally, this wouldn't affect me that much but since I'm using git-svn things are going so well. After I did a fetch it created a folder for each branch in my root folder so I have three folders, drupal, trunk, and client. The drupal folder is git's master branch, client and trunk are the svn branches. Merging and committing works great, in fact everything git related is working superb. However dcommit is totally hosed, it's trying to commit a folder called client and one called trunk. I can't even imagine what havoc this would cause for svn later on. So my question is, what have I done wrong in my .git/config and is there anything I can do to fix this or am I going to have to suffer and go back to using svn? Please don't make me go back. I don't think I can take it anymore. Bastard boss knows how to leave a legacy. [svn-remote "svn"] url = https://svn.mydomain.com/svn/project_name fetch = trunk:refs/remotes/trunk branches = *:refs/remotes/* tags = tags/*:refs/remotes/tags/* Normally the branches line would look like this (when using --stdlayout): branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/branches/* ls output is thus: $ ls client/ docs/ drupal/ sql/ trunk/

    Read the article

  • Listen to all Perforce commands made by my client machine to server

    - by Ed
    Hi, Is it possible to somehow listen to all perforce cammands issued from my machine to the perforce server? I did some googling yesterday and found a page somewhere about a perforce proxy or broker that would intercept perforce commands and allow you to do what you wanted with them before sending them to the server...and now can't find the page! I am trying to debug our build process (built using Maven) that is failing while running the maven-release-plugin (prepare). Cheers.

    Read the article

  • Can Perforce backup files?

    - by Macca
    From reading the Perforce docs it sounds like only changelists and version history can be backed up. Is it possible to get Perforce to create a backup of files too, so that in the event of loss, through hardware failure for example, a complete set of files could be recovered?

    Read the article

  • Git: Create a branch from unstagged/uncommited changes on master

    - by knoopx
    Context: I'm working on master adding a simple feature. After a few minutes I realize it was not so simple and it should have been better to work into a new branch. This always happens to me and I have no idea how to switch to another branch and take all these uncommited changes with me leaving the master branch clean. I supposed git stash && git stash branch new_branch would simply accomplish that but this is what I get: ~/test $ git status # On branch master nothing to commit (working directory clean) ~/test $ echo "hello!" > testing ~/test $ git status # On branch master # Changed but not updated: # (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) # (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) # # modified: testing # no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") ~/test $ git stash Saved working directory and index state WIP on master: 4402b8c testing HEAD is now at 4402b8c testing ~/test $ git status # On branch master nothing to commit (working directory clean) ~/test $ git stash branch new_branch Switched to a new branch 'new_branch' # On branch new_branch # Changed but not updated: # (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) # (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) # # modified: testing # no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") Dropped refs/stash@{0} (db1b9a3391a82d86c9fdd26dab095ba9b820e35b) ~/test $ git s # On branch new_branch # Changed but not updated: # (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) # (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) # # modified: testing # no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") ~/test $ git checkout master M testing Switched to branch 'master' ~/test $ git status # On branch master # Changed but not updated: # (use "git add <file>..." to update what will be committed) # (use "git checkout -- <file>..." to discard changes in working directory) # # modified: testing # no changes added to commit (use "git add" and/or "git commit -a") Do you know if there is any way of accomplishing this?

    Read the article

  • Error after second spec run with rspec and autospec

    - by Sean Chambers
    After installing rspec/ZenTest and running autospec, it runs my specs the first time as expected. After making a change to one of my specs and upon running the second time I get the following results: /usr/bin/ruby1.8 /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/bin/spec --autospec /home/schambers/Projects/notebook/spec/models/user_spec.rb -O spec/spec.opts /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/formatter/progress_bar_formatter.rb:17:in `flush': Broken pipe (Errno::EPIPE) from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/formatter/progress_bar_formatter.rb:17:in `example_passed' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/reporter.rb:136:in `example_passed' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/reporter.rb:136:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/reporter.rb:136:in `example_passed' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/reporter.rb:31:in `example_finished' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/example/example_methods.rb:55:in `execute' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/example/example_group_methods.rb:214:in `run_examples' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/example/example_group_methods.rb:212:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/example/example_group_methods.rb:212:in `run_examples' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/example/example_group_methods.rb:103:in `run' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/example_group_runner.rb:23:in `run' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/example_group_runner.rb:22:in `each' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/example_group_runner.rb:22:in `run' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/options.rb:152:in `run_examples' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/lib/spec/runner/command_line.rb:9:in `run' from /usr/lib/ruby/gems/1.8/gems/rspec-1.3.0/bin/spec:5 Has anyone run into this or know what the heck is going on here? Thanks

    Read the article

  • How to find if a branch is a locally tracked branch or user created local branch?

    - by Senthil A Kumar
    I have a remote tracking branch tracked locally in my local repository using 'git branch -b branch-name origin/branch-name'. My remote branch is test2/test2 (origin/branch-name) which is being tracked locally as test2. The origin is also named test2. I haven't checked-out my local tracking branch test2. When i do a 'git pull origin remote-branch:local-tracked-branch' i get this error [test2]$ git pull test2 test2:test2 From /gitvobs/git_bare/test2 ! [rejected] test2 - test2 (non fast forward) Whereas when i checkout my local tracking branch test2 and do pull 'git pull origin local-tracked-branch' i don't get the error and i do a pull using 'git pull test2 test2' From /gitvobs/git_bare/test2 * branch test2 - FETCH_HEAD Auto-merging a.txt Automatic merge failed; fix conflicts and then commit the result. i know that adding a + (git pull test2 +test2:test2) would help but it overwrites local changes. So how do i know which of my local branches are created by me locally using 'git branch new-branch-name' or tracked locally from remote branches using git branch -b branch-name origin/branch-name'?

    Read the article

  • Merge only a one remote branch into a local branch with Mercurial

    - by Pepijn
    I wan to manage some profiles as XML files in Mercurial repos. The setup I'm thinking of: Each user has a repo with a branch where he manages his own profile, and a number of branches where he can pull and merge other profiles from that branch of another user. So for example I have my own profile branch and a branch labeled friends, in which I want to pull the profile branches of a few remote repos, to collect like a collection of profiles. I figured out that since the repos are unrelated I need to use -f, but I can't figure out how to pull and merge only a single branch into another. So I want like me friend someone profile ---> friends <--- profile \-> family friends <--- profile Is this even possible? Should I use separate repos instead? Is there a better solution?

    Read the article

  • Perforce Proxy Server: Caching selective files [closed]

    - by fbrereto
    I just set up a Perforce proxy server for work. I'm noticing the cache directory is filling up very quickly -- with files I know I will never need. For example, there is a 'sandbox' directory in the depot where users keep personal branches and other work; a p4 sync is causing the p4 proxy cache to grab these user's sandboxes when I'll never need them. I would create a symbolic link for the sandbox directory to /dev/null but then I wouldn't be caching my sandbox, which I am interested in. Is there any way to tell the perforce proxy something to the effect of "if I haven't had to sync it, please don't cache it?"

    Read the article

  • Java: If vs. Switch

    - by _ande_turner_
    I have a piece of code with a) which I replaced with b) purely for legibility ... a) if ( WORD[ INDEX ] == 'A' ) branch = BRANCH.A; /* B through to Y */ if ( WORD[ INDEX ] == 'Z' ) branch = BRANCH.Z; b) switch ( WORD[ INDEX ] ) { case 'A' : branch = BRANCH.A; break; /* B through to Y */ case 'Z' : branch = BRANCH.Z; break; } ... will the switch version cascade through all the permutations or jump to a case ? EDIT: Some of the answers below regard alternative approaches to the approach above. I have included the following to provide context for its use. The reason I asked, the Question above, was because the speed of adding words empirically improved. This isn't production code by any means, and was hacked together quickly as a PoC. The following seems to be a confirmation of failure for a thought experiment. I may need a much bigger corpus of words than the one I am currently using though. The failure arises from the fact I did not account for the null references still requiring memory. ( doh ! ) public class Dictionary { private static Dictionary ROOT; private boolean terminus; private Dictionary A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Y, Z; private static Dictionary instantiate( final Dictionary DICTIONARY ) { return ( DICTIONARY == null ) ? new Dictionary() : DICTIONARY; } private Dictionary() { this.terminus = false; this.A = this.B = this.C = this.D = this.E = this.F = this.G = this.H = this.I = this.J = this.K = this.L = this.M = this.N = this.O = this.P = this.Q = this.R = this.S = this.T = this.U = this.V = this.W = this.X = this.Y = this.Z = null; } public static void add( final String...STRINGS ) { Dictionary.ROOT = Dictionary.instantiate( Dictionary.ROOT ); for ( final String STRING : STRINGS ) Dictionary.add( STRING.toUpperCase().toCharArray(), Dictionary.ROOT , 0, STRING.length() - 1 ); } private static void add( final char[] WORD, final Dictionary BRANCH, final int INDEX, final int INDEX_LIMIT ) { Dictionary branch = null; switch ( WORD[ INDEX ] ) { case 'A' : branch = BRANCH.A = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.A ); break; case 'B' : branch = BRANCH.B = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.B ); break; case 'C' : branch = BRANCH.C = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.C ); break; case 'D' : branch = BRANCH.D = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.D ); break; case 'E' : branch = BRANCH.E = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.E ); break; case 'F' : branch = BRANCH.F = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.F ); break; case 'G' : branch = BRANCH.G = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.G ); break; case 'H' : branch = BRANCH.H = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.H ); break; case 'I' : branch = BRANCH.I = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.I ); break; case 'J' : branch = BRANCH.J = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.J ); break; case 'K' : branch = BRANCH.K = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.K ); break; case 'L' : branch = BRANCH.L = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.L ); break; case 'M' : branch = BRANCH.M = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.M ); break; case 'N' : branch = BRANCH.N = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.N ); break; case 'O' : branch = BRANCH.O = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.O ); break; case 'P' : branch = BRANCH.P = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.P ); break; case 'Q' : branch = BRANCH.Q = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.Q ); break; case 'R' : branch = BRANCH.R = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.R ); break; case 'S' : branch = BRANCH.S = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.S ); break; case 'T' : branch = BRANCH.T = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.T ); break; case 'U' : branch = BRANCH.U = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.U ); break; case 'V' : branch = BRANCH.V = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.V ); break; case 'W' : branch = BRANCH.W = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.W ); break; case 'X' : branch = BRANCH.X = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.X ); break; case 'Y' : branch = BRANCH.Y = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.Y ); break; case 'Z' : branch = BRANCH.Z = Dictionary.instantiate( BRANCH.Z ); break; } if ( INDEX == INDEX_LIMIT ) branch.terminus = true; else Dictionary.add( WORD, branch, INDEX + 1, INDEX_LIMIT ); } public static boolean is( final String STRING ) { Dictionary.ROOT = Dictionary.instantiate( Dictionary.ROOT ); return Dictionary.is( STRING.toUpperCase().toCharArray(), Dictionary.ROOT, 0, STRING.length() - 1 ); } private static boolean is( final char[] WORD, final Dictionary BRANCH, final int INDEX, final int INDEX_LIMIT ) { Dictionary branch = null; switch ( WORD[ INDEX ] ) { case 'A' : branch = BRANCH.A; break; case 'B' : branch = BRANCH.B; break; case 'C' : branch = BRANCH.C; break; case 'D' : branch = BRANCH.D; break; case 'E' : branch = BRANCH.E; break; case 'F' : branch = BRANCH.F; break; case 'G' : branch = BRANCH.G; break; case 'H' : branch = BRANCH.H; break; case 'I' : branch = BRANCH.I; break; case 'J' : branch = BRANCH.J; break; case 'K' : branch = BRANCH.K; break; case 'L' : branch = BRANCH.L; break; case 'M' : branch = BRANCH.M; break; case 'N' : branch = BRANCH.N; break; case 'O' : branch = BRANCH.O; break; case 'P' : branch = BRANCH.P; break; case 'Q' : branch = BRANCH.Q; break; case 'R' : branch = BRANCH.R; break; case 'S' : branch = BRANCH.S; break; case 'T' : branch = BRANCH.T; break; case 'U' : branch = BRANCH.U; break; case 'V' : branch = BRANCH.V; break; case 'W' : branch = BRANCH.W; break; case 'X' : branch = BRANCH.X; break; case 'Y' : branch = BRANCH.Y; break; case 'Z' : branch = BRANCH.Z; break; } if ( branch == null ) return false; if ( INDEX == INDEX_LIMIT ) return branch.terminus; else return Dictionary.is( WORD, branch, INDEX + 1, INDEX_LIMIT ); } }

    Read the article

  • Integrating different branches from external sources into a single Mercurial repository

    - by dukeofgaming
    I'm currently working in a company using Perforce and am making way for distributed version control with Mercurial. I've had success importing Perforce history using the perfarce (quite a suitable name, I laugh every time I see/say it) however, this only works with a single branch at a time. Here's how my P4 integration setup works: In perforce, create a "client", which is kind of a description of what you will be constantly updating/checking-out. This can only address one branch at a time (trunk or other). Once you do this, run hg clone p4://<server>/<client_name> Go to .hg/hgrc and put the perforce path line: perforce = p4://<server>/<client_name> Work normally with the code under mercurial, do hg pull perforce to sync up, hg push to export a changelist What I'd like to be able to do is have a perforce path per branch and have everything work in the same repository. Now, pushing is not a problem, however, if I pull the history from another branch it would end up at the default branch. I'd like to be able to do something like hg pull perforce-R5 and have it land in mercurial's R5 branch. Even if I have no merging history, it would be sweet enough to be able to preserve it. There are also other plugins for CVCSs that let you integrate mercurial, but AFAIK the subversion one has the same problem. I don't think there is a straight-through way of doing this, but as long as I could automate the process with some hooks and scripts in a single Mercurial machine, that would be good enough.

    Read the article

  • Online Perforce Repositories

    - by Oliver Hume
    Is anyone aware of of anybody offering hosted perforce servers? It doesn't have to be free - but preferably not too expensive! My understanding of Perforce is that it's free to use for personal projects, which mine is. Currently I have a perforce server setup on the same machine as the code is on which doesn't offer much security in case of computer failure. If not, can anyone recommend one of the alternative solutions that is similar to Perforce? I have experience of SVN but cannot say I enjoy the experience.

    Read the article

  • My Perforce Eclipse Plugin works only partially

    - by Eye of the Storm
    Hi all, I installed Perforce plugin version 3.4 on Eclipse Ganymede, configured my connection and workspace. My perforce perspective works just fine. However, when I work in the Java perspective, and I right-click any file in the project explorer, the "Team" context menu does not display the perforce options to check-out, sync etc. It only has the options "Apply patch" and "Show local history". This is super-annoying! Help, anyone?

    Read the article

  • Perforce "Locked client" error

    - by Thanatos
    I'm new to Perforce, and it is not going well at all. But currently, I am completely stuck, as all I can get it to say is: $ p4 open a_code_file.cpp Locked client 'my_hostname' can only be used by owner 'perforce'. I have absolutely no idea what I did to upset it, and the error message itself is meaningless gibberish to me. "perforce" doesn't own anything - all the files are owned by me. I am in a Perforce repository, ie, there's a .p4rc a few directories up. Edit: It only seems to be some files. If I: $ cd some_other_directory_in_the_repo $ p4 open a_file ... it works. So it's only some things...

    Read the article

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >