Search Results

Search found 19856 results on 795 pages for 'inversion of control'.

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 154/795 | < Previous Page | 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161  | Next Page >

  • Examples of how to visualize a versioning system?

    - by Alex Gilbert
    My shop is trying to formalize the release management process for an OSS product we maintain. It's a sort of a web development framework/CMS kind of thing, as in it's a product that other projects are built on top of. This makes clear communication about the versioning system especially critical for developers that are using the tool. I'm hoping to find some examples of how best to graph this system so we can communicate it better internally and with outside developers. I know there are lots of standards and best practices around versioning, so I'm hoping this extends to some sort of visual vocabulary as well. As one example, there is a nifty graph at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Versioning#Software_Versioning_schemes. Are there any guides out there on how these sorts of things should be designed?

    Read the article

  • Update website with a single command (git push) instead of FTP drag and dropping

    - by Wolfr
    Situation: I have a local copy of a website I have a server that I have SSH access to What do I want to do? Commit locally until I'm happy with my code Make branches locally Have one master branch that is the one that should be pushed to the server Update the website using a single command (git push origin master) If I set up a git repo locally using git init, and then push to a folder on the server, it doesn't work. When I FTP to the server to check the files, they're actually there. When I SSH into the server and do git status, it's not clean, even though it should be since I just pushed to the server. Steps I'm doing: Make a new folder on my computer (mkdir folder_x) Go into that folder (cd folder_x) Set up a new git repository there (git init) (git repository sets up successfully) Push the repository to the server using git push origin master (where origin is set up as user:[email protected])

    Read the article

  • Pushing from an existing git repo to a new SVN repo

    - by Drew Noakes
    All examples I've found on git-svn detail how to use git to mirror an existing SVN repo, work on it, then commit your changes back. I have a pure git repo, created via git init not git-svn init and want to commit it to a new SVN service (Google Code, to be specific). Is this something that can be done?

    Read the article

  • Git remove directory

    - by hrickards
    I've got a repository on GitHub (http://github.com/hrickards/PHP-Crypto) for a little project me and a couple of others are working on. My development environment is Aptana Studio, and I use the EGit plugin as Aptana is basically Eclipse underneath. Today the designer sent the HTML and CSS for the website with the images in a folder named img. Previously the images were in a folder called images. Thinking nothing of it and being too lazy to update the CSS and HTML, I simply kept the images in the img directory and commited to Git. However, the GitHub web interface shows both the img and images directories, with the images directory being empty. I've tried deleting the images directory with git rm -r images and git rm images, and even mkdir images; git add images; git rm -r images but whatever I try I get the same result: fatal: pathspec 'images' did not match any files. Has anyone got any advice on how to remove images, or am I misunderstanding Git or something?

    Read the article

  • Git : How to revert bulk commits on multiple repos

    - by Rachel
    To update my multiple repos, I did: git bulk fetch origin git bulk pull origin master Now it appears that some of the functionality which was working initially is not working now and so I want to revert back to previous state of my repos. How can this be done ? I tried doing git reset --soft commit id & git reset --hard commit id for one repos but it is not working. Any suggestions.

    Read the article

  • how to change font color and size within single label component in flex

    - by Rees
    i'm trying to create a unordered list in Flex. My issue is that within each line, i want the word NEW to be a different font color and different font size from the rest of the label text. I am unsure of how to do this INLINE within the label component. Any thoughts anyone? <s:VGroup fontSize="15" color="#ffffff"> <s:Label text="\u2022 NEW Invite your friends!" /> <s:Label text="\u2022 NEW Features coming soon!" /> <s:Label text="\u2022 NEW Invite your friends!" /> </s:VGroup>

    Read the article

  • How to implement a good system for login/out into a webapp

    - by Brandon Wang
    I am one of the developers at PassPad, a secure password generator and username storage system. We're still working on it, but I have a few questions on the best way to implement a secure login/out system. Right now, what we plan on doing is to have the login system save a cookie with the username and a session key, and that's all that serves as authentication. The server verifies the two to match. Upon login/out a new key is created. This is a security-related webapp and while we don't actually store any information that might make the user queasy, because it is security-oriented it makes it a necessity for us to at least appear secure in a way that the user would be happy with. Is there a better way to implement a login/out system in PHP? Preferably it won't take too much coding time or server resources. Is there anything else I need to implement, like brute-force protection, etc? How would I go about that?

    Read the article

  • Subversion: Ignore a Directory in the Repo on Commit

    - by Charles
    I have all the boost header files in this repository and when I do a check in it takes a really long time to scan all those files that will never change. Because I want users that checkout the project to be able to compile without installing boost I am in a pickle. I want to checkout everything, and then ignore updates (there will never be any) on a directory. Tortoise svn has a ignore-on-commit change list, but I cannot find anyway to add an entire directory to this list, and I do not fancy the idea of 'modifying' all the boost files so I can add them to this change list. Is there a simple solution?

    Read the article

  • Can I create an ASP.NET MVC 2 project with multiple areas without referencing each Child in the pare

    - by No Refunds No Returns
    This is a follow-up question to my original query: http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1791605/how-can-i-use-multiple-projects-to-separate-a-large-asp-net-mvc-site-into-departm Now that I have this working, is there a way to still have multiple project but not have to reference each child area from the parent project? Ideally I'd like to be able to have multiple, separate and distinct projects that only come together on the production/test machines. I should be able to build and test each "area" separately.

    Read the article

  • How to Make a DVCS Completely Interoperable with Subversion?

    - by David M
    What architectural changes would a DVCS need to be completely interoperable with Subversion? Many DVCSs have some kind of bidirectional interface with Subversion, but there are limitations and caveats. For instance, git-svn can create a repository that mirrors Subversion, and changes to that repo can be sent back to Subversion via 'dcommit'. But the git-svn manpage explicitly cautions against making clones of that repository, so essentially, it's a Subversion working copy that you can use git commands on. Bazaar has a bidirectional Subversion capability too, but its documentation notes that Subversion properties aren't supported at all. Here's the end that I'm pursuing. I want a Subversion repository and a DVCS repository that, in the steady state, have identical content. When something is changed on one, it's automatically mirrored to the other. Subversion users interact with the Subversion repository normally. DVCS users clone the DVCS repository, pull changes from it, and push changes back to it. Most importantly, they don't need to know that this special DVCS repository is associated with a Subversion repository. It would probably be nifty if any clone of the special repository is itself a special repository and could commit directly to Subversion, but it might be sufficient if only the special repository directly interacts with Subversion. I think that's what mostly needed is to improve the bidirectional capability so that changes to Subversion properties are translated to changes in the DVCS repository. Some changes in the DVCS repository would be translated to changes to Subversion properties. Or is the answer to create a new capability in Subversion that interacts with a DVCS repository, using the DVCS repository as just a special storage layer such as fsfs or bdb? If there's not a direct mapping between the things that Subversion and a DVCS regard as having versions, does that imply that there's always going to be some activity that cannot be recorded properly on one or the other?

    Read the article

  • Git index resets itself

    - by trobrock
    Every so often when I run git add . to add new files to my repo my git index will reset and think all the files in the repo have been deleted. I run these commands: git status git add . git status git commit -a -m "Commit message" everything looks fine at all those points until I commit and it says every file was deleted, all I have to do it run git add . and commit again to get the files back, but this becomes a pain. And this doesnt happen every time, maybe about 40% of the time. Anyone know why this might happen? I am on Mac OS 10.6.3 with Git 1.6.6

    Read the article

  • What information should a SVN/Versioned file commit comment contain?

    - by RenderIn
    I'm curious what kind of content should be in a versioned file commit comment. Should it describe generally what changed (e.g. "The widget screen was changed to display only active widgets") or should it be more specific (e.g. "A new condition was added to the where clause of the fetchWidget query to retrieve only active widgets by default") How atomic should a single commit be? Just the file containing the updated query in a single commit (e.g. "Updated the widget screen to display only active widgets by default"), or should that and several other changes + interface changes to a screen share the same commit with a more general description like ("Updated the widget screen: A) display only active widgets by default B) added button to toggle showing inactive widgets") I see subversion commit comments being used very differently and was wondering what others have had success with. Some comments are as brief as "updated files", while others are many paragraphs long, and others are formatted in a way that they can be queried and associated with some external system such as JIRA. I used to be extremely descriptive of the reason for the change as well as the specific technical changes. Lately I've been scaling back and just giving a general "This is what I changed on this page" kind of comment.

    Read the article

  • How do I protect the trunk from hapless newbies?

    - by Michael Haren
    A coworker relayed the following problem, let's say it's fictional to protect the guilty: A team of 5-10 works on a project which is issue-driven. That is, the typical flow goes like this: a chunk of work (bug, enhancement, etc.) is created as an issue in the issue tracker The issue is assigned to a developer The developer resolves the issue and commits their code changes to the trunk At release time, the frozen, and heavily tested trunk or release branch or whatever is built in release mode and released The problem he's having is that a couple newbies made several bad commits that weren't caught due to an unfortunate chain of events. This was followed by a bad release with a rollback or flurry of hot fixes. One idea we're toying with: Revoke commit access to the trunk for newbies and make them develop on a per-developer branch (we're using SVN): Good: newbies are isolated and can't hurt others Good: committers merge newbie branches with the trunk frequently Good: this enforces rigid code reviews Bad: this is burdensome on the committers (but there's probably no way around it since the code needs reviewed!) Bad: it might make traceability of trunk changes a little tougher since the reviewer would be doing the commit--not too sure on this. Update: Thank you, everyone, for your valuable input. I have concluded that this is far less a code/coder problem than I first presented. The root of the issue is that the release procedure failed to capture and test some poor quality changes to the trunk. Plugging that hole is most important. Relying on the false assumption that code in the trunk is "good" is not the solution. Once that hole--testing--is plugged, mistakes by everyone--newbie or senior--will be caught properly and dealt with accordingly. Next, a greater emphasis on code reviews and mentorship (probably driven by some systematic changes to encourage it) will go a long way toward improving code quality. With those two fixes in place, I don't think something as rigid or draconian as what I proposed above is necessary. Thanks!

    Read the article

  • What are .git/info/grafts for?

    - by Big 40wt Svetlyak
    I am trying to figure out what is the 'grafts' in the Git. For example, in one of the latest comments here, Tobu suppose to use git-filter-branch and .git/info/grafts to join two repositories. But I don't understand why I need these grafts? It seems, that all work without last two commands.

    Read the article

  • 2-Version software: Best VCS approach?

    - by Tom R
    I suppose I'd better explain my situation: I'm in the process of developing some software, and I'm at the stage where I'd like to split my project into two branches which differ in features. It so happens that this application is an Android application which I will be deploying on the Market, which has the constraint that every app must have a unique package identifier (sensible, no?). My current approach has been to clone the git repo of my original project, but this causes issues with package names. I want the system to be robust enough so that a bugfix/new feature on one branch will merge into another branch, but only when I want it to. Does anyone have any suggestions?

    Read the article

  • Managing aesthetic code changes in git

    - by Ollie Saunders
    I find that I make a lot of small changes to my source code, often things that have almost no functional effect. For example: Refining or correcting comments. Moving function definitions within a class for a more natural reading order. Spacing and lining up some declarations for readability. Collapsing something using multiple lines on to one. Removing an old piece of commented-out code. Correcting some inconsistent whitespace. I guess I have a formidable attention to detail in my code. But the problem is I don't know what to do about these changes and they make it difficult to switch between branches etc. in git. I find myself not knowing whether to commit the minor changes, stash them, or put them in a separate branch of little tweaks and merge that in later. None those options seems ideal. The main problem is that these sort of changes are unpredictable. If I was to commit these there would be so many commits with the message "Minor code aesthetic change.", because, the second I make such a commit I notice another similar issue. What should I do when I make a minor change, a significant change, and then another minor change? I'd like to merge the three minor changes into one commit. It's also annoying seeing files as modified in git status when the change barely warrants my attention. I know about git commit --amend but I also know that's bad practice as it makes my repo inconsistent with remotes.

    Read the article

  • Branching Strategies

    - by Craig H
    The company I work for is starting to have issues with their current branching model, and I was wondering what different kinds of branching strategies the community has been exposed to? Are there any good ones for different situations? What does your company use? What are the advantages and disadvantages of them?

    Read the article

  • How do people manage changes to common library files stored across mutiple (Mercurial) repositories?

    - by mckoss
    This is perhaps not a question unique to Mercurial, but that's the SCM that I've been using most lately. I work on multiple projects and tend to copy source code for libraries or utilities from a previous project to get a leg up on starting a new project. The problem comes in when I want to merge all the changes I made in my latest project, back into a "master" copy of those shared library files. Since the files stored in disjoint repositories will have distinct version histories, Mercurial won't be able to perform an intelligent merge if I just copy the files back to the master repo (or even between two independent projects). I'm looking for an easy way to preserve the change history so I can merge library files back to the master with a minimum of external record keeping (which is one of the reasons I'm using SVN less as merges require remembering when copies were made across branches). Perhaps I need to do a bit more up-front organization of my repository to prepare for a future merge back to a common master.

    Read the article

  • svn track brand new code base

    - by Fire Crow
    I'm at a company, we keep recieviing new codebases from a third party vendor. we'd like to track the changes in subversion. is there a way to replace a branch with the new code and track the changes? currently we just delete all files in the branch, and then add the new files and commit. we'd like to track the files, but I havn't found a tool that will easily deal with all the .svn directories found in subfolders. does anyone know a tool that will replace an svn directory with a new branch and create the respective modify add and delete records as if the code base was organically modified?

    Read the article

  • How to export all changed/added files from Git?

    - by dr Hannibal Lecter
    Hi all! I am very new to Git and I have a slight problem. In SVN [this feels like an Only Fools and Horses story by uncle Albert.."during the war..."] when I wanted to update a production site with my latest changes, I'd do a diff in TSVN and export all the changed/added files between two revisions. As you can imagine, it was easy to get those files to a production site afterwards. However, it seems like I'm unable to find an "export changed files" option in Git. I can do a diff and see the changes, I can get a list of files, but I can't actually export them. Is there a reasonable way to do this? Am I missing something simple? Just to clarify once again, I need to export all the changes between two specific commits. Thanks in advance!

    Read the article

  • How does git save space and is fast at the same time?

    - by eSKay
    I just saw the first git tutorial at http://blip.tv/play/Aeu2CAI How does git store all the versions of all the files and still be more economical in space than subversion which saves only the latest version of the code? I know this can be done using compression but that would be at the cost of speed, but this also says that git is much faster (though where is gains the max is the fact that most of its operations are offline). So, my guess is that git compresses data extensively it is still faster because uncompression + work is still faster than network_fetch + work Am I correct? even close?

    Read the article

  • Stage untracked files for commit without staging tracked file changes

    - by Blair Holloway
    Oftentimes, when using git, I find myself in this situation: I have changes to several files, but I only want to commit parts of them. I have added several untracked files, which I want to track and commit. Solving the first part is easy; I run: git add -p Then, I choose which hunks to stage, and which hunks remain in my working tree, but unstaged. However, git's patch mode skips over untracked files. What I would like to do is something like: git add --untracked But no such option appears to exist. If I have, say, six untracked files, I could stage them using add in interactive mode and the add untracked option, like so: git add -i a<CR> 1<CR> 2<CR> 3<CR> 4<CR> 5<CR> 6<CR> <CR> q<CR> I feel like there is, or should be, a quicker way of doing this, though. What am I missing?

    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 | 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161  | Next Page >