Related
Not sure if I should be asking here or Server Fault.
Anyhow, I recently started a project at a new job that has SVN installed. I didn't use it even though I was given SSH access with some keygen thing. But now I've done some reading online for beginner's and I'm having a tough time getting past "which svn" after I input a command through SSH. I guess that tells me the path to the repository (which is /usr/bin/svn) but I don't even know how to get to that directory (I'm using Terminal on Mac OS X).
All this makes me feel pretty stupid, since I've never really had to use the terminal to do web projects before and this is my first experience with SVN via SSH (Hell, first time using SSH even).
I have been googling and reading for a weekend now, but I figured someone on here probably has a good idea of where to find the files or to check which are under SVN etc. I think my main problem is finding out how to use the terminal to "get" to the folder I want to be working on.
I did read up on the commands to check if a file is under SVN, check out, update, commit, etc. I would just like to know how to get to these files to do that. Sorry for the noob question and thanks in advance
Bonus points if someone explains the benefits of SSH (I totally understand the benefits of SVN and would love to learn it properly)
You're likely better off using a subversion client. Two of the most popular ones for OS X are http://versionsapp.com and http://zennaware.com/cornerstone/index.php (lately my dev friends seem to like cornerstone more.)
These should let you do all (or nearly all) SVN functions, but by using a GUI. You'll still want to learn the terminology. Take a look at http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.6/svn.basic.html
You want SVN+SSH as it's more secure, but that shouldn't mean you have to use the command line.
Well there is no need to go to the /usr/bin even though svn resides there. /usr/bin is a standard location which is automatically included when the system tries to resolve the location of a file. You should be able to just start using SVN commands like:
svn checkout ...
The benefits of using SVN and SSH are separate questions all together.
svn list --verbose http://host_name/svn_dir will give you a list of the current versioned projects (including revision number and modified date)
svn checkout http://host_name/svn_dir/repository_name projectx will checkout the repo (creating a working copy on your local machine)
I'd recommend the manual here, even if you don't read it to start with and just use it as your first reference point when needed.
I've been using Vim (MacVim) exclusively for months now, and I love it. Before using Vim though, I used Coda (I'm on OSX), and the one thing I miss about Coda is the way it marks my files for publishing via FTP whenever I edit them. I can then choose to upload the modified files single files individually, or to publish all of them in one go.
Is there anything that will do this or similar in Vim?
I'm aware netrw can edit directly over FTP, but I have all my sites running locally as mirrors of the online sites, so I need to edit locally and publish files remotely as and when I need. I've Googled for solutions but can't find anything.
I'm far more productive in Vim while in the editor, but having to open up an FTP program and hunt and peck to copy across files as I edit them seperately is a real pain, and makes me less productive overall when working on websites when compared to working in Coda.
Any suggestions welcome :)
Transmit, Cyberduck and YummyFTP (the ones I know) all have their own version of "automated folder syncing" where you work locally and any modified files are uploaded on change: you setup an "observer" and never have to hit a special button or shortcut again.
If you want to only use MacVim you could write a little command that uploads the current file on save: a script that would use the current file's path to construct an scp command. But this doesn't seem very portable/practical to me. It appears some people have already written something like that: here and there.
The right way is (not only in my opinion) to:
have everything under some kind of VCS like Git, Subversion or Mercurial or whatever floats your boat
write your code in a local clone/checkout and test the hell out of it on a local server
commit only working code
push milestones to a staging server used by you and your clients to test everything, this part can be automated via a post-commit hook or something like that
deploy only validated changes on your production server.
All the aforementioned Version Control Systems can be used directly from Vim's command line with :!git commit or :!svn update… If you need more abstraction, Fugitive (Git-only) or VCSCommand (multi-VCS, my choice) are here to help.
On your loss of productivity due to uploading files: I think it's very normal because you essentially perform very different tasks with very different neurological needs. This speed bump can also be experienced when previewing a layout change in your browser, looking up a color in Photoshop or any other similar task. I don't know of a way to pilot Photoshop, Chrome's dev tools or Outlook from within Vim and I don't think such a gizmo could reallistically exist so you will probably have to bear with it.
You can try git-ftp - a git based command line ftp client. Then you can manage your project as a Git repository, and git-ftp will only upload the files marked with Git - and only if they have changed.
The downside is that you are going to have to learn Git - and that's a bit overkill for what you need.
The upside is that you are going to learn and use Git.
I have since stumbled upon a Vim plugin which works with Transmit (which I happen to use as my main FTP client) and allows me to upload the current file to the server with a simple keymap (Ctrl+U) as I edit.
This strikes a nice balance between being a very simple solution, and one that does enough of what I need to improve my productivity significantly.
Any more suggestions are still welcome!
I LOVE using TextMate on my MacBook. It's great.
Unfortunately, I want to edit some files directly on my dev server, since it's difficult to recreate the environment locally. I'm using Git, so one alternative is to just edit locally, git commit, git push, and then git merge, but that's kind of complicated every time I want to make a simple change.
I'd rather just ... use another solution. One thing I tried is mounting a hard drive via MacFusion, and then loading that in an editor. But that's so freaking laggy/slow!
Has anyone cooked up a better solution?
OK - here is the one that works on Mountain Lion.
Go to http://osxfuse.github.com/
Install FUSE for OS X
Install SSHFS for OS X
Then the following commands on your terminal:
mkdir /Volumes/SSHFS
/usr/local/bin/sshfs username#host:/path/to/dir /Volumes/SSHFS
Done.
I would also recommend using the ReMate plugin as pointed out by another user to prevent TextMate from beach-balling every time you refocus it. Link:
ReMate http://ciaranwal.sh/remate
I use Fetch and TextMate for just such tasks. Fetch can be set to use TextMate as an external editor and can even automatically open files in TextMate by double clicking.
Saving the window in TextMate automatically pushes the file back to the server. Of course you would have to commit the changes on the server at a later time.
I'm sure most Mac FTP clients could do the same.
The best thing would be using TextMate's rmate script, follow the link and you'll find the instructions bellow, I recommend it since it will make your life easier and handle all the Nitty-Gritty.
I use the free version of TextWrangler for just this and it works great. I can load and save files over sftp.
The correct answer is to use sshfs and make sure "Perform atomic saves" is checked in the Textmate preferences window. The easiest way to setup sshfs is to use Macfusion. http://macfusionapp.org/.
Try one of these methods.
see: http://wiki.macromates.com/Main/FAQ#projects
also have a look at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/tramp/
You don't need to push every time you make simple changes; git is a distributed version control system, you commit to your local repository for the small changes. You should only push to the remote repository once you finished working on a feature/bug (or for really huge feature, a complete subfeature). Well, that's assuming you can recreate the environment; which apparently you can't.
A decent text editor can have integration with your favorite control version system; if you cannot configure your editor to commit and push from inside your editor, get a decent editor.
An even better editor can be set to save, commit, push, compile, and run your program all in one click or keypress.
If you are not able — for whatever reason — to replicate your environment locally and still want to use TextMate, the FTP client+TextMate combo is the best solution I can think of. MacFusion and all the other similar solutions are neat on the paper but awfully slow.
If you feel adventurous and confident enough to drop the TextMate requirement, SSH+Vim in the terminal works amazingly well.
Are you positive you can't replicate at all your remote environment?
I know this question already has several answers, and it's been a while, but I wanted to also point out DokanSSHFS - This will use SSH to make a local drive of the directory location on the server that you choose. Then you can use your editor of choice to edit the files as if they were on a local disk.
Most of the proposed solutions are centered around sshfs in one form or another. I have tried these solutions, but I found that reliability of filesystem is not always as good as desired.
There is tool called rmate, which allows editing of remote files in text mate.
Use command from ssh session to edit file on the server:
rmate file_name
The readme on github provides easy to follow instructions on how to set it up.
MacFusion is pretty sweet for free - basically ssh-mounting of directories.
http://macfusionapp.org/
Transmit 4 has a similar feature, tho it costs $$.
Try http://ciaranwal.sh/remate/ if it seems slow, as that will disable textmate from refreshing the file list so often.
Use Fuse for OS X http://osxfuse.github.com and the companion package, SSHFS (same URL) and install them. I installed the MacFUSE compatibility libraries from there too, just for good measure.
Then, install http://macfusionapp.org and follow the instructions located here ( https://github.com/osxfuse/osxfuse/wiki/SSHFS ) to configure macfusion to use the newer libraries.
I had trouble getting authenticated with password, so I set up ssh key authentication and used macfusion without password. Works like a charm.
If you do use an IDE, you could just set up an SSH tunnel to your dev server and edit your files from the comfort of your favourite IDE. Saving the files locally would automatically then push the files on the dev server as well
P.S: I am NOT endorsing the use of IDE
You need rmate it works fine to edit files on your server via ssh using TextMate on you local machine.
Github link here
rmate might be another choice. On server side, you type rmate /path/to/file. The file will be transferred to local machine, where you use some editor like Sublime Text or VS Code (TexMate may also work). To use it, one needs to install both server and client.
For server side, there are several ones in various languages. Choose one you like. Here is the Github repo.
On local machine, as far as I know, VS Code and Sublime Text have their extensions to receive files. For VS Code, refer to here. For Sublime Text, refer to here.
On the other hand, Microsoft just announced an official remote editing extension for VS Code (not released yet).
For those remote machines not having ruby or if bash not compiled with /dev/tcp, but has python, this works: https://github.com/scriptmaster/rmate-python
If you have pip:
pip install rmate
or simply:
wget https://raw.githubusercontent.com/scriptmaster/rmate-python/master/bin/rmate
chmod +x ./rmate
mv ./rmate /usr/local/bin/rmate
then rmate /path/to/file
especially if you are in a containerd-os with restrictions (with only python and docker) such as kubernetes-vm or gce-vm
you don't need vs-code-server, atom-editor,
Closed. This question does not meet Stack Overflow guidelines. It is not currently accepting answers.
Questions asking us to recommend or find a tool, library or favorite off-site resource are off-topic for Stack Overflow as they tend to attract opinionated answers and spam. Instead, describe the problem and what has been done so far to solve it.
Closed 9 years ago.
Improve this question
Background
I work on a lot of small projects (prototypes, demos, one-offs, etc.). They are mostly coded in Visual Studio (WPF or ASP.NET with code written in C#). Usually, I am the only coder. Occasionally, I work with one other person. The projects come and go, usually in a matter of months, but I have a constantly evolving set of common code libraries that I reuse.
The problem
I've tried to use source control software before (SourceGear Vault), but it seemed like a lot of overhead when working on a small project, especially when I was the only programmer. Still, I would like some of the features that version control offers.
Here's a list of features I'd like to have:
Let me look at any file in an older version of my project instantly. Please don't force me through the rigmarole of (1) checking in my current work, (2) reverting my local copy to the old version, and (3) checking the current version back out so I can once again work on it.
In fact, if I'm the only one on the project, I don't ever want to check out. The only thing I want to be able to do is say, "Please save what I have now as version 2.5."
Store my data efficiently. If I have 100 Mb of media in my project, I don't want that to get copied with every new version I release. Only copy what changes.
Let me keep my common library code files in a single location on my hard drive so that all my current projects can benefit from any bug fixes or improvements I make to my library. I don't want to have to keep copying my library to other projects every time I make a change.
However, do let me go back in time to any version of any project and see what the source code (including the library code) looked like at the time that version was released.
Please don't make me store a special database server on my machine that makes my computer take longer to start up and/or uses resources when I'm not even programming.
Does this exist?
If not, how close can I get?
Edit 1: TortoiseSVN impressions
I did some experimenting with Subversion. A couple observations:
Once you check something in to a repository, it does stuff to your files. It puts these hidden .svn folders inside your project folders. It messes with folder icons. I'm still yet to get my project back to "normal". Unversion a working copy got me part of the way there, but I still have folders with blue question mark icons. This makes me grumpy :-/ Update: finally got rid of the folder icons by manually creating new folders and copying the folders over. (Not good.)
I installed the open source plugin for Visual Studio (AnkhSVN). After creating a fresh repository in my hard drive, I attempted to check in a solution from Visual Studio. It did exact what I was afraid it would do. It checked in only the folders and files that are physically (from the POV of the file system) inside my solution folder. In order to accomplish item #5 above, I need all source code used by solution to be check in. I attempted to do this by hand, but it wasn't a user friendly process (for one thing, when I selected multiple library projects at once and attempted to check them in, it only appeared to check in the first one). Then, I started getting error dialogs when I tried to check in subsequent projects.
So, I'm a little frustrated with SVN (and its supporting software) at this point.
Edit 2: TortoiseHG impressions
I'm trying out Mercurial now (TortoiseHG). It was a little bit difficult to figure out at first, no better or worse than TortoiseSVN I'd say. I noticed an RPC Server on startup (relates to item 6). I figure it should be possible to turn this off if I'm not sharing anything with anyone, but it wasn't something I could figure out just by looking at the options (will check out the help later).
I do appreciate having my local repository as just a single .hg folder. And, simply throwing the folder in the Recycle Bin seemed to be all I needed to do to return everything back to normal (i.e., unversion my project). When I check in (commit), it seems to offer a simple comment window only. I thought maybe there would be a place to put version numbers.
My (probably not very clever) attempt to add a Windows shortcut (a folder aliasing my library projects) failed, not that I really thought it would work :) I thought maybe this would be a sneaky way to get my library projects (currently located elsewhere) included in the repository. But no. Maybe I'll try out "subrepos", but that feature is under construction. So, iffy that I'll be able to do items 4 and 5 without some manual syncing.
Any of the distributed source control solutions seem to match your requirements. Take a look at bazaar, git or mercurial (already mentioned above). Personally I have been using bazaar since v0.92 and have no complaints.
Edit: Heck, after looking at it again, I'm pretty sure any of those 3 solutions handles all 6 of your requested features.
Distributed Version Control Systems (Mercurial, Bazaar, Git) are nice in that they can be completely self-contained in a single directory (.hg, .bzr, .git) in the top of the working copy, where Subversion uses a separate repository directory, in addition to .svn directories in every directory of your working copy.
Mercurial and Subversion are probably the easiest to use on Windows, with TortoiseHG and TortoiseSVN; the Bazaar GUIs have also been improving. Apparently there is also TortoiseGit, though I haven't tried it. If you like the command line, Easy Git seems to be a bit nicer to use than the standard git commands.
I'd like to address point 4, common libraries, in more detail. Unfortunately I don't think any of them will be too easy to use, since I don't think they're directly supported by GUIs (I could be wrong). The only one of these I've actually used in practice is Subversion Externals.
Subversion is reasonably good at this job; you can use Externals (see the chapter in the SVN book), but to associate versions of a project with versions of a library you need to "pin" the library revision in the externals definition (which is itself versioned, as a property of the directory).
Mercurial supports something similar, but both solutions seem a bit immature: subrepository support built-in to the latest version and the "Forest Extension".
Git has "submodule" support.
I haven't seen anything like sub-respositories or sub-modules for Bazaar, unfortunately.
I think Fog Creek's new product, Kiln, will get you pretty close. In response to your specific points:
This is easily done through the web interface -- you don't need to touch your local copy or update. Just find the file you want, click the revision you want to see, and your code will be in front of you.
I'm not sure you can do things exactly like "Please save this as version 2.5", but you can add unique tags to changesets that allow you to identify a special revision (where "special" can mean whatever it wants to you).
Mercurial does a great job of this already (which Kiln uses in the back end), so there shouldn't be any problems in this regard.
By creating different repositories, you can easily have one central 'core' section which is consistent across various projects (though I'm not entirely sure if this is what you're talking about).
I think most version control systems allow you to do this...
Kiln is hosted, so there's no hit on performance to your local machine. The code you commit to the system is kept safe and secure.
Best of all, Kiln is free for up to two licenses by way of their Student and Startup Edition (which also gets you a free copy of FogBugz).
Kiln is in public beta right now -- you can request your account at my first link -- and users are being let as more and more problems are already resolved. (For some idea of what current beta users are saying, take a look at the Kiln Knowledge Exchange site that's dedicated to feedback.)
(Full Disclosure: I am an intern currently working at Fog Creek)
For your requirements I would recommend subversion.
Let me look at any file in an older version of my project instantly. Please don't force me through the rigmarole of (1) checking in my current work, (2) reverting my local copy to the old version, and (3) checking the current version back out so I can once again work on it.
You can use the repository browser of Tortoise Svn to navigate to every existing version easily.
In fact, if I'm the only one on the project, I don't ever want to check out. The only thing I want to be able to do is say, "Please save what I have now as version 2.5."
This is done by svn copy . svn://localhost/tags/2.5.
Store my data efficiently. If I have 100 Mb of media in my project, I don't want that to get copied with every new version I release. Only copy what changes.
Given by subversion.
Let me keep my common library code files in a single location on my hard drive so that all my current projects can benefit from any bug fixes or improvements I make to my library. I don't want to have to keep copying my library to other projects every time I make a change.
However, do let me go back in time to any version of any project and see what the source code (including the library code) looked like at the time that version was released.
Put your libraries into the same svn repository as your remaining code and you'll have global revision numbers to switch back all to a common state.
Please don't make me store a special database server on my machine that makes my computer take longer to start up and/or uses resources when I'm not even programming.
You only have to start svnserve to start a local server. If you only work on one machine you can even do without this and use your repository directly.
I'd say that Mercurial along with TortoiseHg will do what you want. Of course, since you don't seem to be requiring much, subversion with TortoiseSvn should serve equally well, if you only ever work alone, though I think mercurial is nicer for collaboration.
Mercurial:
hg cat --rev 2.5 filename (or "Annotate Files" in TortoiseHg)
hg commit ; hg tag 2.5
Mercurial stores (compressed) diffs (and "keyframes" to avoid having to apply ten thousand diffs in a row to find a version of a file). It's very efficient unless you're working with large binary files.
Symlink the library into all the projects?
OK, now that I read this point I'm thinking Mercurial's Subrepos are closer to what you want. Make your library a repository, then add it as a subrepository in each of your projects. When your library updates you'll need to hg pull in the subrepos to update it, unfortunately. But then when you commit in a project Mercurial will record the state of the library repo, so that when you check out this version later to see what it looked like you'll get the correct version of the library code.
Mercurial doesn't do that, it stores data in files.
Take a look on fossil, its single exe file.
http://www.fossil-scm.org
As people have pointed out, nearly any DVCS will probably serve you quite well for this. I thought I would mention Monotone since it hasn't been mentioned already in the thread. It uses a single binary (mtn.exe), and stores everything as a SQLite database file, nothing at all in your actual workspace except a _MTN directory on the top level (and .mtn-ignore, if you want to ignore files). To give you a quick taste I've put the mtn commands showing how one carries out your wishlist:
Let me look at any file in an older version of my project instantly.
mtn cat -r t:1.8.0 readme.txt
Please save what I have now as version 2.5
mtn tag $(mtn automate heads) 2.5
Store my data efficiently.
Monotone uses xdelta to only save the diffs, and zlib to compress the deltas (and the first version of each file, for which of course there is no delta).
Let me keep my common library code files in a single location on my hard drive so that all my current projects can benefit from any bug fixes or improvements I make to my library.
Montone has explicit support for this; quoting the manual "The purpose of merge_into_dir is to permit a project to contain another project in such a way that propagate can be used to keep the contained project up-to-date. It is meant to replace the use of nested checkouts in many circumstances."
However, do let me go back in time to any version of any project and see what the source code (including the library code) looked like at the time that version was released.
mtn up -r t:1.8.0
Please don't make me store a special database server on my machine
SQLite can be, as far as you're concerned, a single file on your disk that Monotone stores things in. There is no extra process or startup craziness (SQLite is embedded, and runs directly in the same process as the rest of Monotone), and you can feel free to ignore the fact that you can query and manipulate your Monotone repository using standard tools like the sqlite command line program or via Python or Ruby scripts.
Try GIT. Lots of positive comments about it on the Web.
How do you store file permissions in a repository? A few files need to be read-only to stop a third party program from trashing it but after checking out of the repository they are set to read-write.
I looked on google and found a blog post from 2005 that states that Subversion doesn't store file-permissions. There are patches and hook-scripts listed (only one url still exists). Three years later does Subversion still not store file permissions and are hooks the only way to go about this? (I've never done hooks and rather use something that is native to Subversion.)
SVN does have the capability of storing metadata (properties) along with a file. The properties are basically just key/value pairs, however there are some special keys like the 'svn:executable', if this property exists for a file, Subversion will set the filesystem's executable bit for that file when checking the file out. While I know this is not exactly what you are looking for it might just be enough (was for me).
There are other properties for line ending (svn:eol-style) and mime type(svn:mime-type).
There's no native way to store file permissions in SVN.
Both asvn and the patch from that blog post seem to be up (and hosted on the official SVN repository), and that's a good thing, but I don't think they will have such metadata handling in the core version any time soon.
SVN has had the ability to handle symbolic links and executables specially for a long while, but neither work properly on Win32. I wouldn't hold my breath for another such non-portable feature (though it wouldn't be too hard to implement on top of the already existing metadata system.)
I would consider writing a shell script to manually adjust file permissions, then putting it in the repository.
One possible solution would be to write a script that you check in with the rest of your code and which is run as the first step of your build process.
This script runs through your copy of the codebase and sets read permissions on certain files.
Ideally the script would read the list of files from a simple input file.
This would make it easy to maintain and easy for other developers to understand which files get marked as read-only.
Since this wasn't fully said in previous responses yet. I hate to resurrect zombied threads though.
Since adding permission support for SVN would have to accommodate multiple OS's and permission types, NFS, POSIX, ARWED, and RACF
This would make SVN bloated, possibly clash with conflicting permission types like NFS and POSIX, or open up possible exploits/security vulnerabilities.
There are a couple of workarounds.
pre-commit, post-commit, start-commit are the more commonly used, and are a part of the Subversion system.
But will allow you to control the permissions with what ever programming language you like.
The system I implemented is what I call a packager, that validates the committed files of the working copy, then parses a metadata file, which lists out the default permissions desired for files/folders, and any changes to them you also desire.
Owner, Group, Folders, Files
default: <user> www-user 750 640
/path/to/file: <user> non-www 770 770
/path/to/file2: <user> <user> 700 700
You can also expand upon this and allow things such as automated moving, renaming them, tagging revision by types, like alpha, beta, release candidate, release
As far as supporting clients to checkout your repository files with permissions attached to them. You are better off looking into creating an installer of your package and offering that as a resource.
Imagine people setting their repositories with an executable in it set with permissions of root:www-user 4777
This is the updated link for SVN patch which handles unix style file permissions correctly. I have tested out on fedora12 and seems to work as expected:
I just saved it /usr/bin/asvn and use asvn instead of svn command if i need permissions handled correctly.
Many answers have stated that svn does not store file permissions. This may be true, but I was able to solve a dll file without execute permissions problem simply by these steps:
chmod 755 badpermission.dll
mv badpermission.dll ../
svn update
svn rm badpermission.dll
svn commit badpermission.dll -m "Remove dll to fix permissions"
mv ../badpermission.dll .
svn add badpermission.dll
svn commit badpermission.dll -m "Add the dll back to fix permissions"
rm badpermission.dll
svn update
badpermission.dll comes back with execute permissions
#morechilli:
The asvn wrapper from my earlier post and the blog in the OP's post seems to do what you're suggesting. Though it stores the permissions in the corresponding files' repository properties as opposed to a single external file.
I would recommend to generate permissions map using mtree utility (FreeBSD has it by default), store the map in the repository, and, as was mentioned above, run a script that would restore proper file permissions from the map as the first step of the build process.
Locking would not solve this problem. Locking stops others from editing the file. This is a third party application which gets run as part of the build process that tries to write to a file - changing it - which breaks the build process. Therefore we need to stop the program from changing the file which is simply marking the file read-only. We would like that information to be held in the repository and carried across checkins, branches, etc.
Graham, svn doesn't store permissions. Your only option is to wrap your call to svn in a script. The script should call svn with its arguments, then set the permissions afterward. Depending on your environment, you might need to call your script svn and tweak your PATH to ensure it gets called.
I quite like morechilli's idea to have the list of files and permissions checked into the repository itself.
We created a batch file to do this for us. Would prefer actual support in subversion though...
Consider using svn lock to disallow others from writing to the file.