I am searching for a solution to automatically merge files on upload.
To be more precise, we are working in small groups doing web-development, working on the same folder on our Debian Server remotely, so the Problem is of course that if we often have the situation, where up to 3 People need to write in the same php file, at the moment we are trying to coordinate when which person is allowed to work on it.
So my idea was if there is a subversion like solution, to just merge every time we save the file via sshfs.
You should use version control. Here are some options. Which one you should use depends on a variety of factors.
Mercurial
Git
Subversion
You can then have the server your site is on pull from the repository.
Related
I a writing a little webapp, which allows the users to browse through a Visual SVN server. I would like to add an online editor like github in this webapp, so users can edit the files online, leave a message and the changes appear in the repository.
For that I need to checkout the files locally. My idea was to check them in a mongodb out, so I can save the changes per user like a local working copy.
Is there a way (without reimplementing the svn protocol) to make a checkout in a database or even just the memory and then write it in the database.
If there are any questions, just ask :)
Btw. if someone is interested, here is the code https://bitbucket.org/Knerd/svn-browser
There is no way to do svn checkout to directly to database. But there is some options.
First of all, you can simple create virtual disk that resides in memory and perform checkouts to that disk. Than you can store checked out files to database.
Another option is to use rich Subversion API directly. Note, that Subversion is written in C, so you will need to build bridge between Node.js and SVN (as far as I can remember, there is no official Subversion bindings for Node.js, but there is for Python and Java and there is unofficial nodesvn package available for Node.js). Using the API you can implement your own 'in-database' working copy.
Also you can use svnmucc utility (which is shipped with VisualSVN Server) to make commits directly in the repository (without even making a working copy). If you combine it with svn ls, svn info etc. you can implement repository browsing and editing of files.
I am using a commercial Subversion hosting service. In order to make a copy of the entire repository, I can make a request. This gets put into a queue, which normally takes hours. In addition, I have several (10s of) projects hosted there. Each copy request has to be separately for each project, which is kind of painful if I want to do this on a regular basis.
So, is there a way I can make an exact copy of the archive from a Linux command line? i.e., just with the SVN client installed?
Or is there any easy (preferably scriptable) way to obtain an archive copy of my repositories?
Kind Regards,
Madeleine.
Take a look at the tool rsvndump. It looks like it'll do what you want.
For Subversion version 1.7 or later, there is the command: svnrdump which worked for me.
Syntax:
svnrdump dump https://yourRepository/yourProject > yourProject.dump
I have been going through documentation and such and have SVN working, but I want to put it on an existing directory. I imported that directory, so do I rename/delete the non SVN directory and then checkout the SVN to the non SVN directory location? I am just trying to understand how to get it to start posting to our website URL.
If so, is there any way to keep the current non SVN and make it SVN rather than import and overwrite?
Thanks, I am trying to understand SVN, but find a lot of the tutorials and such on the web to be confusing.
Yes, you have it exactly. Once your code has been added to the repository, you can get rid of or rename your original code directory. Then checkout the project from the repository into the same location as your previous code and continue working from there.
UPDATE
To make it so that your website is updated from the repository, you actually need two working directories, and a repository.
Repository: The repository stores the code and changesets, but isn't directly accessible as a file system. Keep a backup!.
Working directory 1: You develop and test your code from a working directory checked out from the repository. Commit changes back to the repository.
Working directory 2: Rename the code directory on your webserver. Checkout a copy of the code to your web server in its place. Technically it is now a working directory, since it contains the .svn metadata directories, though you won't usually make changes here.
Make changes to your code from your development working directory (1) and commit them back to the repository. When you are satisfied that they are working correctly and have been properly tested, on the web server's code copy (2) do svn update (or if you're using Tortoise SVN on the web server, do an update). This will synchronize the server code with the current development version.
Subversion will not automatically push updates to your web server. You will need to pull them in with an update when you need to. It is possible to use what's called a "post-commit hook" to cause Subversion to execute a script when commits are made, and that script could update or export code to your production web server. However, you would need to write the script and it's kind of an advanced usage of Subversion. I would recommend trying out the method I described with a working copy on the web server to get accustomed to the workflow befrore trying anything more complicated.
Addendum If you really want to do this (and I don't really recommend it unless you really test well) a very easy method would be to schedule a cron job that does svn update every couple of hours (or minutes) on your production site.
Don't forget that if you do happen to modify your code directly on the web server, you must commit it back to the repository from there, and do an update on your development working copy.
Do you use Subversion while developing a website with drupal ?
I'm not talking about modules development, but websites development (i.e. adding hook functions, modifying template file.. etc)
thanks
Yes.
Anything that's got any kind of ongoing development or is going to change over time should be version controlled.
Even if you're just doing a very small project, the value of having a version history is indesputable, and being able to make changes without worrying about overwriting someone else's updates is priceless.
Yes, its's good keep a SVN repository synced with your local instance.For that purpose you can use Eclipse.
Yes, but we are moving to git in the near future because it offers a better feature set (distributed SCM ftw) and more options for managing our code base (git submodules, stashing, better hook integration, better merging support, rebasing, and so much more). For the time being we've got our repos setup like so:
/trunk
/branches/6.x/1.x/core
/branches/6.x/1.x/sitename.domain.edu
/branches/6.x/1.x/sitename2.domain.edu
/branches/6.x/1.1.x/core
/branches/6.x/1.1.x/sitename.domain.edu
...
/tags/6.x/1.x/core
/tags/6.x/1.x/sitename.domain.edu
/tags/6.x/1.x/sitename2.domain.edu
/tags/6.x/1.1.x/core
/tags/6.x/1.1.x/sitename.domain.edu
...
Each branch is a svn copy of the trunk repo (where we do most of our development) and each tag is a svn copy of it's corresponding branch. The core branch is the primary distro that we distribute to all of our sites that share the university's look and feel, and each subsite is a site with special modules, custom theme, or any other functionality that isn't part of the primary distro. It makes moving between drupal releases a lot easier, but you can start to run into problems merging occasionally. Also you run into performance issues when the repo starts to grow, which is part of the reasoning behind moving to git.
Yes. Version control is critical. Distributed version control systems such as Git, Mercurial, and Bazaar are particularly nice, and let you start committing immediately, without the need to push those changes to a central server.
My Drupal workflow: use Mercurial and its sub-repositories feature to create independent repositories for 1) Drupal + contributed modules, 2) theme, and 3) custom modules. That way, I can clone from a single URL, get my entire project, and be able to track changes to each distinct piece independently.
I have 3 Linux machines, and want some way to keep the dotfiles in their home directories in sync. Some files, like .vimrc, are the same across all 3 machines, and some are unique to each machine.
I've used SVN before, but all the buzz about DVCSs makes me think I should try one - is there a particular one that would work best with this? Or should I stick with SVN?
I've had this problem for years, and I don't think version control is necessarily the right way to go. I've had good success with the the Unison file synchronizer which is designed for the express purpose of maintaining consistent home directories on two machines. I'm currently managing seven replicas with unison, and the details are a bit tricky, but it is a great tool and if you start with two you will be extremely pleased.
The key difference between Unison and a VCS is that Unison is willing to delay dealing with conflicts that have to be merged. Plus it gets all the defaults right. And it is fast: I use it daily, over a DSL line, to synchronize about 40GB of data.
Any DVCS would likely work fine. My favorite is Bazaar. It would be easiest to keep your config files in .config, version that, and then symlink as appropriate.
A benefit of DVCS is that you can version the per-machine config files as well, without interfering with versioning global configs.
I've had the same problem, and built a tool on top of Subversion that adds permission, ownership and secontext tracking, keeps the .svn directories out of the actually versioned trees, and adds a concept of layers so you can for example track all your config related to development, which you then only check out on machines you use for developing.
This has helped me organize my settings much better across the 50+ machines I log into.
Here's the project page. It's still a little rough around the edges, but we also use it at work to version system configuration for our 60+ servers.
In general, any version control system that uses some sort of metadata files to track stuff is going to cause you pain as is when actually using it.
Version control software isn't really great for home directories. Worse, some software doesn't really like the .svn folders or starts to interpret their contents. You could of course try to fix this with some very complex mirroring setup, but that's hard.
Here's a Mozilla developer that's tried to do this: Version controlling my home dir, there's a couple of suggestions in the comments.
git or Mercurials's cheap branching would work great for this situation. I started with Mercurial, because it is simpler, but have subsequently moved to git.
One way to handle this very flexibly is to have a build directory under revision control, not try and svn your actual home directory (which has its own issues)
so inside this you keep a structure like
/home/you/code/dotfiles
/home/you/code/dotfiles/dotbashrc
/home/you/code/dotfiles/dotemacs
...
/home/you/code/dotfiles/makefile
and the makefile can contain logic for specializing files (or not)
might be heavier than you need, but if your actual setup is complex (I've done this across 3 or 4 different unices at a time) then it's worth doing something like this.
I use git for this. So far, I have been able to keep the home directories on several machines synchronized, with no need for branching and merging. Instead, I use git rebase. Conflicts so far have been few and far between and easy to resolve.
I keep files that need to have separate contents out of revision control by putting them into .gitignore.
I keep configuration files for the following tools in git:
various shells
emacs and applications, i.e.
gnus
BBDB
emacs-w3m
mutt
screen
various utilities and scripts
I keep notes and such in a subdirectory which has its own git repository.
I would suggest looking into etckeeper if you haven't already. It's designed for versioning configuration files in /etc using a version control system:
etckeeper is a collection of tools to
let /etc be stored in a git,
mercurial, darcs, or bzr repository.
It hooks into apt (and other package
managers including yum and pacman-g2)
to automatically commit changes made
to /etc during package upgrades. It
tracks file metadata that revison
control systems do not normally
support, but that is important for
/etc, such as the permissions of
/etc/shadow. It's quite modular and
configurable, while also being simple
to use if you understand the basics of
working with revision control.
Although it's designed for /etc I think it would probably also work well (perhaps with some adaptation) for home directories since the basic needs are the same.
I know this is an old thread but found it while searching for some dotfiles.
My current system is using subversion. The key thing I did was check out the working copy into ~/.svnhome/ (in hindsight should have called it .dotfiles or something more generic). I then create symlinks to the files I actual use on that computer into home. For example my .procmail and .spamassassin folders are only needed on the mail server so I don't link those on my home server.
The only file that has some differences is the .bashrc file has some extra lines on my mac for macports. So at the bottom of .bashrc I have it check if .bashrc_local exists and parses that.
This is the last remaining thing I have using subversion (everything else is using git aside from work). The benefit of svn is because it's not a dvcs so I don't have to worry about accidentally committing on one server and forgetting to push it.
I have considered moving it to git so I could create branches. Using the above example I would have a branch for my main server that I would add the .procmail and .spamassassin folders but not have those in the master branch. But the current system has worked fine for years--before git even existed--and don't have any particular motivation to change it now.