Search Results

Search found 341 results on 14 pages for 'branching'.

Page 3/14 | < Previous Page | 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12  | Next Page >

• dvcs - is "clone to branch" a common workflow?

  - by Tesserex

  I was recently discussing dvcs with a coworker, because our office is beginning to consider switching from TFS (we're a MS shop). In the process, I got very confused because he said that although he uses Mercurial, he hadn't heard of a "branch" or "checkout" command, and these terms were unfamiliar to him. After wondering how it was possible that he didn't know about them and explaining how dvcs branches work "in place" on your local files, he was quite confused. He explained that, similar to how TFS works, when he wants to create a "branch" he does it by cloning, so he has an entire copy of his repo. This seemed really strange to me, but the benefit, which I have to concede, is that you can look at or work on two branches simultaneously because the files are separate. In searching this site to see if this has been asked before I saw a comment that many online resources promote this "clone to branch" methodology, to the poster's dismay. Is this actually common in the dvcs community? And what are some of the pros and cons of going this way? I would never do it since I have no need to see multiple branches at once, switching is fast, and I don't need all the clones filling up my disk.

  Read the article

• Useful git commit messages for merged branches

  - by eykanal

  As a follow-up to this question: If I'm working on a team by myself, I can maintain useful commit messages when merging branches by squashing all the commits to a single diff and then merging that diff. That way I can easily see what changes were introduced in the branch, and I have a single summary describing the feature/change/whatever that was accomplished in that branch when browsing the master branch. My question now is, how can I accomplish this when working with a team? In that situation, the branches will be pushed to a remote repository, meaning that I can't squash all the commits in the branch down to a single commit. If the branch is public, can I still have a single useful merge commit in the master branch? (By "useful" I mean that the commit in the master line tells me (1) a useful summary of what was done in the branch and (2) diffs of the same.)

  Read the article

• How to keep the trunk stable when tests take a long time?

  - by Oak

  We have three sets of test suites: A "small" suite, taking only a couple of hours to run A "medium" suite that takes multiple hours, usually ran every night (nightly) A "large" suite that takes a week+ to run We also have a bunch of shorter test suites, but I'm not focusing on them here. The current methodology is to run the small suite before each commit to the trunk. Then, the medium suite runs every night, and if in the morning it turned out it failed, we try to isolate which of yesterday's commits was to blame, rollback that commit and retry the tests. A similar process, only at a weekly instead of nightly frequency, is done for the large suite. Unfortunately, the medium suite does fail pretty frequently. That means that the trunk is often unstable, which is extremely annoying when you want to make modifications and test them. It's annoying because when I check out from the trunk, I cannot know for certain it's stable, and if a test fails I cannot know for certain if it's my fault or not. My question is, is there some known methodology for handling these kinds of situations in a way which will leave the trunk always in top shape? e.g. "commit into a special precommit branch which will then periodically update the trunk every time the nightly passes". And does it matter if it's a centralized source control system like SVN or a distributed one like git? By the way I am a junior developer with a limited ability to change things, I'm just trying to understand if there's a way to handle this pain I am experiencing.

  Read the article

• Importing an existing project into Git

  - by Andy

  Background During the course of developing our site (ASP.NET), we discovered that our existing source control (SourceGear Vault) wasn't working for us. So, we decided to migrate to Git. The translation has been less than smooth though. Our site is broken up into three environments DEV, QA, and PROD. For tho most part, DEV and the source control repo have been in sync with each other. There is one branch in the repo, if a page was going to be moved up to QA then the file was moved manually, same thing with stuff that was ready for PROD. So, our current QA and PROD environments do not correspond to any particular commit in the master branch. Clarification: The QA and PROD branches are not currently, nor have they ever been in source control. The Question How do I move QA and PROD into Git? Should I forget about the history we've maintained up to this point and start over with a new repo? I could start with everything on PROD, then make a branch and pull in everything from QA, and then make another branch off of that with DEV. That way not only will the branches reflect the differences in the environments, they'll be in the right order chronologically with the newest commits in the DEV branch. What I've tried so far I thought about creating a QA branch off of the current master and using robocopy to make the working folder look like the current QA environment. This doesn't work because the new commit from QA will remove new files from DEV and that will remove them when we merge up, I suspect there will be similar problems if I started QA at an earlier (though not exact) commit from DEV.

  Read the article

• Git doesn't sync files until committed, even if checked out in a different branch

  - by DertWaiter

  Okay, I have git 1.7.11.1 on Windows and I have a local test repository with 2 branches. One is master with index.php and help.php. I then create another branch called slave :) I run from git bash rm help.php and it disappears from the folder, but I don't stage anything. I switch to checkout master branch and it is supposed to restore file help.php because it is not modified in the master branch, isn't it? And it does not do it. When I go back to the slave branch and commit and then switch to checkout master then help.php appears. Is that the way it is supposed to to work? Why?

  Read the article

• Git Branch Model for iOS projects with one developer

  - by glenwayguy

  I'm using git for an iOS project, and so far have the following branch model: feature_brach(usually multiple) -> development -> testing -> master Feature-branches are short-lived, just used to add a feature or bug, then merged back in to development and deleted. Development is fairly stable, but not ready for production. Testing is when we have a stable version with enough features for a new update, and we ship to beta testers. Once testing is finished, it can be moved back into development or advanced into master. The problem, however, lies in the fact that we can't instantly deploy. On iOS, it can be several weeks between the time a build is released and when it actually hits users. I always want to have a version of the code that is currently on the market in my repo, but I also have to have a place to keep the current stable code to be sent for release. So: where should I keep stable code where should I keep the code currently on the market and where should I keep the code that is in review with Apple, and will be (hopefully) put on the market soon? Also, this is a one developer team, so collaboration is not totally necessary, but preferred because there may be more members in the future.

  Read the article

• GitHub OS project how to have a good version and a work in progress version

  - by Para

  I have started my own OS application, I am hosting it on GitHub. My problem is that I push changes to the repository from more than one location so sometimes I want to work on it and sometimes I can't always finish something in time but I would still like to push it anyway so I can fetch it later from my other location. I'd like to be able to somehow have a stable version and have the master branch be a 'work in progress'. How do I do this? Is there some button I can push that will take the code from my master branch and make it into a zip file in my downloads tab and call it a version or should I do this by hand? Would it be better to have the master branch be nice and neat and have a separate branch to play with and then merge the two when the time is right? Would this not cause more problems in the merging phase?

  Read the article

• Git dont sync files untill committed even if checkout different branch

  - by DertWaiter

  Ok i have git 1.7.11.1 on windows and i have local test reposotory with 2 branches one is master with index.php help.php then i create another branch called slave :) I run from git bash rm help.php and it dissapears from the folder, but i dont stage anything. I switch to checkout master branch and it supposed to restore file help.php because its not modified in master branch isnt it? And it does not do it. When i back to slave branch and commit and then switch to checkout master then help.php appears. is that the way it supposed to be why?

  Read the article

• Version control and branching when using Oracle

  - by Ed Woodcock

  Hi folks: At work we're using Oracle and C#/ASP.net to handle a customer's website, this site is very large-scale so the database is very large. We use Perforce for our version control, and tack create or replace scripts to FogBugz cases whenever a database change, which has been fine until now, as we are now at a point where five developers are working on five expansions for the system, each on a seperate Perforce branch. Unfortunately, we cannot get duplicate databases, due to the database size, so everyone is still working from the same one. This is obviously a cause of problems: only ten minutes ago we had a bit of an issue where a stored procedure change for a branch propagated over to the Pre-Production server and caused a large number of crashes for the testers. Ideally, we would like a way to track these changes without having to manually keep track of them through FogBugz. My question is: how do you lot handle this situation? I'm sure there must be a good way by now to handle versioning, or at least tracking changes, in an Oracle database.

  Read the article

• Removing part of a branch

  - by benPearce

  In our codebase we are using the following structure, using TFS / - Build - Development - Dev1 - Dev2 - Main - Releases - Rel1 - Rel2 The Development and Releases sections contain branches off main. The Build section sits outside the branching. Within each of the branches there is a section which should not have been included within the branching which I would like to move under Build. Is it possible to move this section out and remove its branching information? If I do a rename what impact might this have when creating new branches or merging?

  Read the article

• Source control Branching needs

  - by Mükremin

  Hello, we are creating hospital information system software. The project will be different hospital to hospital and contain different use cases. But lots of parts will be the same. So we will use branching mechanism of the source control. If we find a bug in one hospital, how can we know the other branches have the same bug or not. Resim The numbers in the picture which we attached show the each hospital software. Do you have a solution about this problem ? Which source control(SVN,Git,Hg) we will be suitable about this problem ? Thank you.!

  Read the article

• Mercurial Tagging/Branching Strategy

  - by Tony Trozzo

  My current project is broken down into 3 parts: Website, Desktop Client, and a Plug-in for a third party program. We had started out originally with Subversion for our source control but decided to try Mercurial after reading Joel Spolsky's final post. Considering we haven't really used the majority of svn's potential before, we figured starting fresh with some basic ideas of how source control worked would make this transition easy. However, after setting up our initial repository, we're lost as to how tagging and branching should work on a project like this. Essentially, we're working on all 3 of these parts at the same time. We want a release to be a combination of the 3 parts. Currently we're working in one repository. For the Plug-in part, we have the first iteration finished which we've been referring to as Plug-In v0.1. For the first official build of the other two parts, we'd also like to refer to them as Website v0.1 and Desktop Client v0.1. When all three parts are at v0.1, we'd like to have a Full Project v0.1. Our problem is we're not sure how to manage all of this in the Hg repository. Would the best way to handle this be to create 3 separate repositories for the 3 stable versions and then 3 more repositories for the current developments? Currently we have this all in one repository. Should we do this in branches (are branches any different from cloning repositories?) and tags? Any help is greatly appreciated.

  Read the article

• How do I branch an individual file in SVN?

  - by Michael Carman

  The subversion concept of branching appears to be focused on creating an [un]stable fork of the entire repository on which to do development. Is there a mechanism for creating branches of individual files? For a use case, think of a common header (*.h) file that has multiple platform-specific source (*.c) implementations. This type of branch is a permanent one. All of these branches would see ongoing development with occasional cross-branch merging. This is in sharp contrast to unstable development/stable release branches which generally have a finite lifespan. I do not want to branch the entire repository (cheap or not) as it would create an unreasonable amount of maintenance to continuously merge between the trunk and all the branches. At present I'm using ClearCase, which has a different concept of branching that makes this easy. I've been asked to consider transitioning to SVN but this paradigm difference is important. I'm much more concerned about being able to easily create alternate versions for individual files than about things like cutting a stable release branch.

  Read the article

• Question about 'git branching'

  - by michael

  Hi, I read this about git branch: http://book.git-scm.com/3_basic_branching_and_merging.html so I follow it and create 1 branch : experimental And I 1. switch to experimental branch (git checkout experimental) 2. make a bunch of changes 3. commit it (git commit -a) 4. switch to master branch (git checkout master) 5. make some changes and commit there 6. switch back to experimental (git checkout experimental) 7. merge master change to experimental (git merge master) 8. there are some conflicts but after I resolve them, I did 'git add myfile' And now i am stuck, I can't move back to master when I do $ git checkout master error: Entry 'res/layout/my_item.xml' would be overwritten by merge. Cannot merge. and I did: $ git rebase --abort No rebase in progress? and I did : $ git add res/layout/socialhub_list_item.xml $ git checkout master error: Entry 'res/layout/my_item.xml' would be overwritten by merge. Cannot merge. What can I do so that I can go back to my master branch? Thank you.

  Read the article

• Image 8-connectivity without excessive branching?

  - by shoosh

  I'm writing a low level image processing algorithm which needs to do alot of 8-connectivity checks for pixels. For every pixel I often need to check the pixels above it, below it and on its sides and diagonals. On the edges of the image there are special cases where there are only 5 or 3 neighbors instead of 8 neighbors for a pixels. The naive way to do it is for every access to check if the coordinates are in the right range and if not, return some default value. I'm looking for a way to avoid all these checks since they introduce a large overhead to the algorithm. Are there any tricks to avoid it altogether?

  Read the article

• PHP - Database schema: version control, branching, migrations.

  - by Billiam

  I'm trying to come up with (or find) a reusable system for database schema versioning in php projects. There are a number of Rails-style migration projects available for php. http://code.google.com/p/mysql-php-migrations/ is a good example. It uses timestamps for migration files, which helps with conflicts between branches. General problem with this kind of system: When development branch A is checked out, and you want to check out branch B instead, B may have new migration files. This is fine, migrating to newer content is straight forward. If branch A has newer migration files, you would need to migrate downwards to the nearest shared patch. If branch A and B have significantly different code bases, you may have to migrate down even further. This may mean: Check out B, determine shared patch number, check out A, migrate downwards to this patch. This must be done from A since the actual applied patches are not available in B. Then, checkout branch B, and migrate to newest B patch. Reverse process again when going from B to A. Proposed system: When migrating upwards, instead of just storing the patch version, serialize the whole patch in database for later use, though I'd probably only need the down() method. When changing branches, compare patches that have been run to patches that are available in the destination branch. Determine nearest shared patch (or oldest difference, maybe) between db table of run patches and patches in destination branch by ID or hash. Could also look for new or missing patches that are buried under a number of shared patches between the two branches. Automatically merge down to the nearest shared patch, using the db table stored down() methods, and then merge up to the branche's latest patch. My question is: Is this system too crazy and/or fraught with consequences to bother developing? My experience with database schema versioning is limited to PHP autopatch, which is an up()-only system requiring filenames with sequential IDs.

  Read the article

• Mercurial local branching and pushing to shared repository

  - by Steve Horn

  I created a branch on my local Mercurial repository. I want to push to the shared repository so my work can be backed up, but I don't want other project members to see the branch. What's the standard operating procedure in this case? I'd like to avoid having the repository get full of developer branches that I don't need to see.

  Read the article

• git-svn cannot create a branch to follow SVN branching

  - by Serhiy Yakovyn

  Hello everybody, I'm struggling with the following issue. When I continue fetching revisions from SVN with git svn fetch I'm getting the following error (removed https to be able to post question): *Found possible branch point: somecompany.com/product/trunk = somecompany.com/product/branches/deep/branches/product-001, 72666 Found branch parent: (refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001) b685b7b92813885fdf 6b8e2663daf884bf504b14 Following parent with do_switch Successfully followed parent error: 'refs/remotes/deep' exists; cannot create 'refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001' fatal: Cannot lock the ref 'refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001'. update-ref -m r72667 refs/remotes/deep/branches/product-001 df51920e8f0a53f26507 c2679eb6a9dbad91e0d6: command returned error: 128* This happened because I was fetching revisions using the default filter for SVN branches: [svn-remote "svn"] url = https://somecompany.com/someproduct fetch = trunk:refs/remotes/trunk branches = branches/*:refs/remotes/* tags = tags/*:refs/remotes/tags/* Now, I have the line below added, but it's too late: branches = branches/deep/branches/*:refs/remotes/deep/branches/* I have tried to fix this by using git reset to remove all the commits. Actually I can see from the error message that git is trying right thing, but cannot because of the branch remotes/deep being existing. I have tried to search for 2 possible solutions: 1. Remove that branch (remotes/deep), but as it is tracked by git as a remote, I was not able to find any solution for that. 2. Remove the whole history related to that branch. No success too :( Does anybody know how to deal with my issue? Thank you in advance, Serhiy Y

  Read the article

• Optimize conditional operators branching in C#

  - by abatishchev

  Hello. I have next code: return this.AllowChooseAny.Value ? radioSpecific.Checked ? UserManager.CurrentUser.IsClient ? txtSubject.Text : subjectDropDownList.SelectedItem.Text : String.Empty : UserManager.CurrentUser.IsClient ? txtSubject.Text : subjectDropDownList.SelectedItem.Text; or in less complex form: return any ? specified ? isClient ? textbox : dropdown : empty : isClient ? textbox : dropdown; or in schematic form: | any / \ specified isClient / \ / \ isClient empty textbox dropdown / \ textbox dropdown Evidently I have a duplicated block on two different levels. Is it possible to optimize this code to probably split them to one? Or something like that..

  Read the article

• Cheap cloning/local branching in Mercurial

  - by Zack

  Hi, Just started working with Mercurial a few days ago and there's something I don't understand. I have an experimental thing I want to do, so the normal thing to do would be to clone my repository, work on the clone and if eventually I want to keep those changes, I'll push them to my main repository. Problem is cloning my repository takes alot of time (we have alot of code) and just compiling the cloned copy would take up to an hour. So I need to somehow work on a different repository but still in my original working copy. Enter local branches. Problem is just creating a local branch takes forever, and working with them isn't all that fun either. Because when moving between local branches doesn't "revert" to the target branch state, I have to issue a hg purge (to remove files that were added in the moved from branch) and then hg update -c (to revert modified files in the moved from branch). (note: I did try PK11 fork of local branch extension, it a simple local branch creation crashes with an exception) At the end of the day, this is just too complex. What are my options?

  Read the article

• Branching logic in an MVC view

  - by Alex Kilpatrick

  I find myself writing a lot of code in my views that looks like the code below. In this case, I want to add some explanatory HTML for a novice, and different HTML for an expert user. <% if (ViewData["novice"] != null ) { % some extra HTML for a novice <% } else { % some HTML for an expert <% } % This is presentation logic, so it makes sense that it is in a view vs the controller. However, it gets ugly really fast, especially when ReSharper wants to move all the braces around to make it even uglier (is there a way to turn that off for views?). My question is whether this is proper, or should I branch in the controller to two separate views? If I do two views, I will have a lot of duplicated HTML to maintain. Or should I do two separate views with a shared partial view of the stuff that is in common?

  Read the article

• Branching and remote heads in Mercurial

  - by hekevintran

  I created a new branch using this command: hg branch new_branch After the first commit to the new branch, the default branch becomes inactive. If this is pushed the central repository will have only one head which belongs to the new branch. When my colleague pushes his commits on the default branch, he will get this error: pushing to ssh://... searching for changes abort: push creates new remote heads! (did you forget to merge? use push -f to force) Is there anything bad about forcing the push? Why are remote heads bad? How do you work remotely on separate branches and push to one repository?

  Read the article

• Mercurial and particular files branching

  - by zerkms

  The context: i have a project, that contains configs/ directory, which contains (surprise-surprise!) a set of config files: database.php, facebook.php, twitter.php, cache.php, etc What I did in svn: I have created branches per specific file and made changes there (changed database connections, facebook API keys, etc). So they were stored in my private branch. Now I'm trying to migrate to "modern" nowadays DSCM - Mercurial. And I cannot get any possibility of doing the same. Any ideas?

  Read the article

• Rejoin branching using jQuery formwizard?

  - by Vinay

  jQuery formwizard (http://thecodemine.org/) allows you to branch a form wizard based on inputs. I am trying to figure out if it possible to rejoin the branches (and not just for the last step.) e.g. Based on the inputs to Step 1, I'd like to present the user with a different step 2. However, after step 2, the remaining steps (step 3, 4, 5, etc.) should all be the same. How can this be done? Thanks!

  Read the article

• Conditional Branching Issues

  - by Zack

  Here is the code: def main_menu print_main_menu user_selected = gets.chomp if user_selected.downcase == "no" main_menu elsif user_selected == "1" || "2" || "3" || "4" || "5" || "6" || "7" user_selected = user_selected.to_i call_option(user_selected) else main_menu end end This code uses calls to allow a user to make a selection from a main menu. Depending on the input, be it a certain number, a certain word, or something else, the respective method is called (in the case of a valid input) or the main menu is printed again (in the case of an invalid input or "no"). My questions are twofold. 1) Is there an efficient way to get rid of the literal string error that appears as a result of this redundant or statement on the elsif line? (the code itself works fine, but this error appears and is frustrating). 2) When an alternate/unspecified input is made by the user, the else branch doesn't execute and main_method doesn't start over. I have no idea why this is happening. Is there something I'm missing here? Thanks

  Read the article

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