I have an app that I have been working on and I did a bunch of changes and then realized later I should have been adding versioning to the Core Data model. So I'm trying to go back and do that now.
Basic information:
I think everything I've done would fall under the lightweight migration feature.
I'm using git
I already have the app in user's hands
My question is: what is the easiest way to do this?
Since I'm using git, could I simply checkout the data model from when I submitted it to apple, create a new version for it, and add my changes? My main fear with this idea is that my project.pbxproj file would be incorrect. Would this an issue? Is there a way to get around this?
IF I could do this, would I need to recreate my class files or would that be ok (assuming I get it back to being identical to what I currently have).
IF I CAN'T do this, then what can I do? If its a matter of starting from the last version I pushed to Apple and applying changes I guess I should look into doing it with git rebase, right?
This has nothing to do with git.
You need to create a new version of your app, provide the new data model, set it for lightweight migration and then release it as an update. Core Data will basically assume that any model without version info is version zero and attempt a migration to the new version.
When the user downloads the update, the automatic migration will trigger the first time the app runs.
Creating a new version means nothing more than changing the version number in the project info. When submitted, that will trigger the upgrade and the migration.
Related
We have multiple repos and whenever the developer runs the sonarQube scanner through Jenkins job, it is creating one project with build number along with the date, is there anyway I can re-use the same project name ..?
developers are running sonarQube reports through Jenkins jobs.
sonar.projectKey=portal1-sonar:1stiteration-${BUILD_NUMBER}
sonar.projectName=SonarQube nodeJS portal1 Build : ${BUILD_NUMBER}_${BUILD_TIMESTAMP}
anyway, I can change and use same project name, whenever developer runs sonarQube.
every project is defined in SonarQube with it's own key. That means if the key is the same, it is the same Project, and you will have a "history" of analyses and can compare parameters.
Although the idea of buildnumbers seems to be interesting, i recommend to use Branch names instead. There are currently two ways of doing this, for the first one, you need to have a SonarQube installation with a paid price. Than you are entitled to use the branch plugin. Which is actually the more superior way, because your project will show branches. The sonarQube docs are quiet helpful regarding this.
The old/Deprecated way will create a new project per branch, which you can than compare. the property you need to set is sonar.branch and this will be automatically added to your project key. So if the project key is Project and the sonar.branch is set to develop your new project will have the key Project:develop. This parameter is deprecated, and i am not sure, how long it will stay in the system.
A while back I generated a project with JHipster Registry, among other things (let's call it conf1). After a few months I realized I don't need it and changed everything I need to so my project would work properly (this one will be conf2) and it work as expected.
Now, every time I want to upgrade my project, JHipster generates everything based on config1 instead of config2, which means my changes to get rid of anything I don't want, for instance JHipster Registry, get overridden by the upgrade.
So my question is: what do I need to change so that every time I upgrade to a new JHipster version, I don't get it done based on config1?
Deleting the jhipster_upgrade branch solved the issue.
I wanted to check out the inner workings of the Spectator View feature, but I got stuck.
Checking out the Repo, Unity complains about missing the HololensForCV.dll. I didn't get very far.
I found the Microsoft HoloLensForCV repository, but could not compile it. I'm not even sure, if it did, that it will spit out the desired dll.
How do I get the branch to work?
Update:
We have migrated to a new repository with samples and better documentation, please take a look here: https://github.com/microsoft/MixedReality-SpectatorView.
==================================================
Could you please try checking out this branch:
https://github.com/microsoft/MixedRealityToolkit-Unity/tree/prerelease/2019.build.spectatorView
We have documentation for SpectatorView specifically here:
https://github.com/microsoft/MixedRealityToolkit-Unity/blob/prerelease/2019.build.spectatorView/Assets/MixedRealityToolkit.Extensions/SpectatorView/SpectatorView.md
Please give it a try, and let me know if that helped.
The feature/spectatorView branch in the Microsoft MixedRealityToolkit-Unity repo no longer has any scripts with dependencies on the dlls built out of HoloLensForCV. It may be worth checking your commit log to see if it matches with the current commit history for the feature/spectatorView.
FWIW, the main feature/spectatorView branch is undergoing a lot of refactoring/breaking changes. We forked the prerelease/2019.build.spectatorView branch so that folks could start looking at ASA localization for spectator view without having to be broken by rapid development underway in the feature branch. This prerelease only supports ASA localization for an android and HoloLens (1 or 2) device. ArUco marker and QR code based localization is in progress but not yet supported.
We are starting to use TFS2013 (we use svn still, but for a number of reasons we're putting new code on TFS).
I have a solution that contains a project with an EF database model and I would like to share it with a different solution (to be more specific: there is a client website solution and a separate one for backend).
On SVN I would have created svn externals - I would be able to share the code easily and if I branched, the shared project would have a nice copy on branch as well. Moreover, both projects would have the most up-to-date version of the db model, which suits me perfectly.
TFS 2013 seems to push be pushing towards NuGets. That means, that if I create a nuget package of the db project:
I will have to update the db projec separately each time there is a db change, release it and then update all projects that use it
If I branch, I'll probably have to create a different nuget package for the branched version and amend the nuget reference on merge
It pollutes the nuget repo with things that are not exactly worth a repository (in case of a DB model, you want to have the latest possible version because a website will probably break if you don't, no point for versioning so that the build doesn't break)
I spent some time trying to find a suitable solution, but the best idea I found is just referencing the project from a different solution - the problem with it is, I would have to make the root folder for the build be higher than just the solution and that would add several more projects that I don't need. Another idea is referencing by branching, which was good for TFS 2010 with multiple projects, but I can't fit it into my scenario (we have a single 'Main' node where we put all solutions).
So, how would you share a DB project on TFS 2013?
I've been doing some research into finally automating our Development builds and still have one nagging question that I'm hoping the StackOverflow community can solve for me.
My understanding is that an IntervalTrigger when setup properly will check VSS every X seconds for changes and if it finds a modified file, will run my tasks. One of my tasks would be to checkout the AssemblyInfo files and update the version numbers. After these files are updated they would be checked back into VSS.
Thinking about this solution it doesn't make much sense because in my mind, I'm forcing the check for changed files to true every time the trigger fires. Am I missing something here? Is there a way of doing this without triggering an automatic build on the AssemblyInfo check-in?
You can use a Filtered Source Control Block to exclude certain files from the trigger.
I just posted a bunch about my default build process here which may be of some interest to you: SVN Website Development and Deployment Solution
The way I usually configure my projects with CC.NET is to have two project blocks per solution. One configured as an interval trigger that does nothing more than get the latest from my repository, build the solution, and run unit tests. The other is a schedule trigger that does all the things the other one does, but actually publishes a build. This includes changing version numbers, publishing files, etc. This might work in your case, since the change in version would cause the interval project to trigger, but only once.
Checking the automatically generated AssemblyInfo into the version control system is a bad idea, don't do it. You'll get a lot of noise (50% of all commits!) in your history. Also, it does not give you any new information - you can always pull this from VCS. Have your build script autogenerate those files is a good practice, but don't push those changes back!