|
Just so you know, if you run the update using --diff3-cmd thisisnotaprogram, it will simply replace everything it was going to merge (because by giving it a junk command to run you have effectively broken that feature). I don't know if this will help you, but I thought it might.
|
#
¿
Nov 9, 2009 16:59
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
BizarroAzrael posted:Sorry, accidentally unbookmarked the thread. That sounds useful, so I just pass any bullshit there as an argument and it will stop merging? That's been my experience on Windows and OSX from at least 1.4.something up to relatively current builds - I haven't had to do it in at least a few months. Relying on it does make me a little nervous because I bet they could change the behavior to throw an error and end the operation if they really wanted, but if they do I hope they add a 'stomp on changes' flag. Also keep in mind that the diff only happens when SVN feels the need to merge things - it won't just stomp on any file newer than the repo copy, but at least it won't try to merge anything. I'm assuming it will act the same w.r.t. directories with unversioned files as it always does, but I didn't think to test that.
|
|
#
¿
Nov 23, 2009 19:05
|
|
|
musclecoder posted:Pretty sure loving up a subversion repository is pretty hard to do. You can do pretty easily it if you have a group of people using a single repo shared over a network, or at least you could. I suppose it's possible they changed that. Otto Skorzeny posted:Chlamydia: syphilis done right Well, if you have to pick between the two, you go with the chlamydia. Munkeymon fucked around with this message at 17:10 on Jan 19, 2010 |
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2010 17:04
|
|
|
musclecoder posted:I think you're referring to a working copy. If you have several people working on the same shared copy over a network, you're doing source control wrong. At the place I used to work we had a repo on a network share that we all used that got a little buggy on us because the database wasn't able to use the filesystem read/write locking over the share. I fixed it by setting up the SVN server and having everyone use that.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 19, 2010 17:15
|
|
|
Lysidas posted:What are you trying to say here? The point is that there's a lot more you can do locally with a DVCS. Pretty sure he's saying that he would want everything everyone is working on to be stored in one place that's obvious and accessible. The best way to do that is to force them to use a central repository and the best way to do that is to lock them into a system where they can pretty much only do things that way. Enforcing management decisions like that through technical limitations is also pretty popular though obviously not ideal. And yes it does make some sense from the perspective of a manager who can't spare the time to comb through team members' machines looking for the repository they were working on that new feature in that they never bothered to push to the central repository because they didn't know ahead of time there was going to be a death in the family last night (or some similar situation). Clearly that's not going to happen often, but avoiding it might take a higher priority in some minds than everyday convenience.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 11, 2010 20:26
|
|
|
Is there any way to pause and restart a clone in git like one might a normal HTTP transfer? Our shittastic router likes to choke transfers over ~1 MB that aren't encrypted. My normal way around this is to 'pause' the transfer and restart it until finished, but I don't see a way to do that to git. Yes, I tried using git://. Never buy ZyXEL products, btw.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2010 17:51
|
|
|
uXs posted:Can you do an incremental clone? Get a few changesets at a time, not everything at once. I did not realize this was possible. quote:Or you could do the clone from somewhere sane, burn it on dvd, and just copy it. Once you have it, you can link it again to original repo. Changesets from that point should be small enough to work. And I was about to come back and ask if it was safe to copy a local repo from a different machine to my own, but it sounds like you're saying it is, so I'm going to go try.
|
|
#
¿
Oct 6, 2010 19:11
|
|
|
gariig posted:GitHub for Windows was just released. Imagine the Zune UI for you GitHub account. I'm just installing it at work (we use TFS) to see what it looks like. I hope this ends the whole "git isn't for Windows" argument. Trip report: it modified a bunch of files in some existing repos (540 different files in one of them!) it found that I had sitting around just to build stuff and then refused to let me do anything with them until I checked in my 'changes'. I just deleted them because I don't feel like cleaning up the mess. Hey, it sure does look pretty.
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2012 18:38
|
|
|
Suspicious Dish posted:GitHub for Windows does not have a build system. What kinds of changes did it make? Not sure - all the diffs had the same content in both old and new sections, but all of the files in question had their modification times changed. Git tracks permissions, right? Maybe the GH client has different ideas about what the Windows permissions mean than does the CygWin git system, which I normally use (and by 'normally' I mean I pull down code to use libraries - I'm not a regular git user).
|
|
#
¿
May 23, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Dromio posted:I've dealt with then when switching between msysgit and cygwin on the same repo. I think it has to do with the core.filemode setting. See https://groups.google.com/a/chromium.org/group/chromium-dev/browse_thread/thread/d0474d7afdcd36cc?pli=1 for a decent explanation. No dice - it still fucks with files with core.filemode false This is fairly ironic since I have no earthly clue how to pull a repo from inside their interface, if there is even a way. I guess I could try some other git client and see if I see the same problem, but I'm not really motivated enough right now. edit:  I see - there's a button on GitHub to do it for me so I don't get the crazy idea that I might use this thing as a general git GUI client.edit 2: Ha ha it still fucks up when I use their own client to do the clone. Only 36 uncommitted 'changes' instead of the 300+ I was seeing, but I'm still not gonna consider this for an actual project at this rate. Munkeymon fucked around with this message at 13:53 on May 29, 2012 |
|
#
¿
May 25, 2012 22:49
|
|
|
I had an interview earlier today at a place that uses https://sourcegear.com/vault/ It's a small team but they write software that basically runs factories and I was momentarily taken aback when the dev I talked to described it as "a better version of VSS" because that's such a low bar to clear that it doesn't seem worth mentioning. I mean, he could have just said "it's like VSS but it works" and I'd be less worried but, yeah, I'm a little worried. Should I be more than a little worried?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 06:02
|
|
|
They did mention that they're currently on a push to clear out archaic poo poo from their production environment, but their ethos struck me a very pragmatic so, if Vault works, I'm guessing they'll just want to keep using it. Hmm
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2015 07:00
|
|
|
I did ask all my normal interview questions and that was the only red-flaggy thing that came up. They switched to it from VSS years ago and just don't care to change it because I guess it works for them. If you guys told me that it was basically ClearCase but for MS shops I'd be actually worried but it sounds like it's not a total horror, so I'm still hoping for an offer.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2015 15:00
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 09:12 |
|
|
boo_radley posted:You avoid this kind of janitor work with a workspace-per-branch scheme. We have 900+ projects with multiple branches per project, so we'd feel a lot more pain immediately if we tried to pull in an entire project's code across all branches at once. Huh. Let's say I have an e-commerce site that's three solutions: front-end, back-end services and internal management tooling. They share a project containing communications APIs/DTOs and whatnot. Let's say we want code to flow from a Dev to a QA into a Live branch. What is TFS supposed to look like if the admin doesn't begin with the assumption that it's supposed to work just like SVN?
|
|
#
¿
Mar 7, 2017 18:36
|
|