I know it's a beginner question but I don't want to mess things.
I was using Tortoise SVN so far when working with gitHub.
When I was working on my fork, and I wanted to update files from my fork, I would just pick update.
I'm far to be a professionnal of all those gitHub stuff. But now I just want to do the equivalent of it in Tortoise Git, and I'm afraid to click anything because I don't know most of the options yet.
To summarize: Equivalent of Tortoise SVN update with Tortoise Git?
Update is actually fetch and merge (which can be done by pull).
revert would undo a committed snapshot.
I believe what you want is probably the revert option?
It will revert to what is on GitHub.
Related
I think I've done something rather stupid which may have cost me a couple of days of work. What follows is a question not so much about GIT itself as how to recover some files I have lost in the process of trying to use Git on a Mac.
I have been using Atlassian Sourcetree to make Git commits and pushes and to work with other members on a team. I have only been committing, pushing and pulling from Git.
As I've mentioned, I've been using SourceTree, but I wanted to evaluate Github for Mac as well.
At the time, I had made some changes to the files in my Git repo, representing about six hours of work. I did NOT commit or push these changes.
After I installed Github, I stupidly set Github to clone the repo to the same folder on my Mac as I had been making my changes in... essentially, Github downloaded the repo and overwrote all of my changes.
There were some files that were overwritten, and some new files that I created that were deleted.
Is there is a way to retrieve these files, either by some Git-based voodoo or some aspect of Mac OS X journaling that I'm not aware of? I would really appreciate hearing about it if there is.
So, from what I remember from having my life destroyed by my stupidity with git, it has a place where you can find your old code.
Go to your main repo folder and then type cd .git/lost-found/other/ or cd .git/lost-found/
You should be able to find a set of files that were older and you can then manually get them back by copying them in.
Here's some more links on it :
Recovering added file after doing git reset --hard HEAD^
Undo a git pull
http://www.quora.com/Git-revision-control/How-can-I-recover-a-file-I-deleted-in-my-local-repo-from-the-remote-repo-in-Git
I will start by saying this is probably a dumb question so apologies if I am staring at the answer but cannot see.
I have used VCS in the past primarily as a method of allowing me to revert my code if something goes wrong. I have always had a single lime of development. However I get into the usual trouble when releasing and starting the next version - dealing with bugs. So this time I decided to use branching (forking or whatever is the best name). I am a lone developer so I am the only one working with the repositiory. My scenerio is simple. I want to create a branch when I release so that I have a line for the released code and a line for the beta. I can then work happily on the beta. Now a bug comes in and I need to get back to the last commit for the release.
My question is what is the best way to get back that code in the IDE to work on it.
I have read that in Mercurial a simple way is to clone the repository including the working directory. This would give me two copies of the code base and I guess I can choose which one to load into the IDE. I would then use Push or pull to get the bug fixes from the release copy into the beta copy (I think).
I assume there must be another way however without cloning. How would I do that? I can guess at reverting to the last commit of the release code. Then I assume that loading the solution into the IDE would give me that. I am not sure where I would go from there when the code is done.
For the record I looked at a number of different VCS - I have used SVN in the past but wanted to go to a DVCS. I looked at Git, Bazaar, Mercurial and Veracity (and used Code-Coop in the past). You may think another tool would suit my needs better. Having tried the others however I found I could understand the way Mercurial works and the GUI tools such as TortoiseHg with the WorkBench and HgSccPackage (http://visualstudiogallery.msdn.microsoft.com/9bc074fa-9e1f-4ce2-a75d-b90e65f7475a) appeal
There are a lot of good documents and links here Introduction to Mercurial and I have read about different ways to branch that include using bookmarks and so on but they seem primarily targeted at multi member teams - which make sense of course
Many thanks in advance
You are mixing concepts a little, i guess you have SVN background ?
Just to answer you question, to 'get back the code in IDE' you will need to 'update' to a previous version. But this is considering you already have cloned the repository. Is your question about how to clone.. ? As you ask, there is no other way without cloning first. Cloning is the first step towards having a HG repository local. After clone, you can commit and push changes or pull and update.
To expand the answer even further and given that you are going to use Mercurial, here is what you should do:
read this : http://hginit.com/ - great HG (tutorial) by Joel Spolsky him self ! An introduction into HG and the concepts. You will need to understand this very good, since right now you are doing a lot of guessing, assuming and thinking :) HG/Git is different from SVN and in the begging the concepts might be hard to understand and to get used to.
for your project and regarding your question, have a branch called 'dev' or 'trunk' or 'version X' etc where you will commit all new changes.
have a branch called 'live' etc that will represent the current 'live' version. This way, whenever you need to revert back in time to the live version and to do a quick fix on it, you will 'update' to the tip of that 'live' branch, discarding all local changes (after you have committed to trunk! of course).
when putting a version to live, you will need to (assuming all changes are committed !) : update to the live branch then MERGE the version X into local (local being live ). This will include your versionX branch into live - it's what you need at this point. Then, either update back to version X branch or create a new branch - version X+1. This will take care of the versions and keeping the branches separate.
since you are using VS - install http://visualhg.codeplex.com/. HG source control integrated into VS.
I assume there must be another way however without cloning
Yes. You can use (named) branches inside single repo (I prefer HgSccPackage in VS), update to revisionbranch head, change, commit, merge
BTW, branching with bookmarks/clones/branches work the same (good) way for any size of team - it's a matter of taste
So, I am working on a project with XCode. Happily, I found out that it keeps an Git repository within every project. So, after a mistake on a code, i just used
git checkout aux.c
to move back from theses mistakes. Unfortunately, as i just found out, Xcode does not auto-commit, so, I ended up with a blank file.
I didn't commited anything after this, but still can't figure out how to undo this checkout.
Sorry, you can't. :-( You're going to have to replace the file some other way.
There are two places where git tracks your files - commits, and the index/staging area. Since there was no commit, and you checked the version of the file out of the staging area, there's no other place it would be.
Do run git status just in case, to make sure it doesn't still show staged changes to that file.
Any chance you had it open in an editor still and could undo the changes to the file that git checkout made? Some editors like Textmate and SublimeText will allow that; others don't.
If the file has never been committed to the repository then unfortunately you are out of luck.
From the sounds of it, you simply have an empty git repository, which will mean your file has been lost and something Versions (which comes with Lion) or Time Machine may be your best bet at recovering from your mistake.
To confirm if anything has been committed to the repository, use git log. If you get an empty response then you're out of luck on the git front.
Unfortunately, this probably this isn't the answer you were looking for.
In fact, undoing a first commit on git is impossible. So, if you are running Xcode, commit manually frequently.
But, there is another way.
If you are running OS X 10.7 Lion or latter (not sure about Snow Leopard), you can try to use the versions feature from OS X to recover any file. Too late for me, but it should work
Best way to recover if your uncommitted changes would be to go to (Left Pane) Source Control Navigator -> Stashed Changes -> Look for a file which dated/timed earlier than your commit which you would like to reverse and click to apply stash changes to the file. That would bring back all the unsaved files back.
I'm doing a single developer Visual Studio solution and reached a point where I'd like to incorporate Versioning Control. Several posts address this issue, but one problem I'm facing is a large merge. I have a production copy of the solution and a beta copy. They are NOT dramatically different, but they will require a number of interactions I suspect. I'm using TortoiseSVN and have imported the production version.
Yes, I know I should have used Version Control from the start, but that is hind sight. Would it be best practice to simply use the beta as a reference and work the interations from scratch. Or should I branch off and import the beta separately, then attempt to merge the change. Or is there another alternative I'm missing.
Thanks,
dgp
well, I have experienced SVN in the past ... and I must say, it's lovely cause it's really easy to understand the concept, but it's awful terrible when things pass from the plain commit.
I'm currently using GIT (to host small code on GitHub) and Mercurial (Hg) (I use Kiln in the company - was recommended by myself so they can start using - and in BitBucket for personal use)
I have used SVN for more than a hole year and every time I need something from "the past" or to merge something, it was a nightmare, but the server/client concept was really a break deal and extremely easy to get it... but I found my self, over and over to do merging by hand :(
When GIT started to be hot, I was afraid to move as, dang! SVN was a pain, why should be different in a DVCS?
This videos rocked my world, [ part 1 part 2 ], only then I understood DVCS vs VCS and it was with this that I moved COMPLETELY to DVCS and never go back... proudly!
For your problem, I would install git (or hg), and then create a repository on the folder you have your current source with:
git init will tell your folder, "Hey, I'm a GIT Repo"
git add . let's add all files and folders to be tracked by git
git commit -m "initial commit" let's save all the hard work :)
So, now you have a tracked code, you can simple create a branch and overwrite all your files. YES, worry not, you don't need to have copies of your code in a folder called branch ;) no more copies! all is in the GIT database
then, after creating the branch, changed the files, added all files to be tracked on that branch and committed, safely do a merge :)
ohh, and you don't need a server connection to do all this, all you need is a computer with GIT installed... no more connection dependencies! DVCS is cool or what?! :D
This is a rather embarrassing question, but I am rather pressed for time, and can get on with other work while someone far more knowledgeable in Git than me could answer it in seconds.
I've just done a fetch from a remote repo, but I have no working copy files. I'm using Git GUI on Windows, and I can visualise the history, and at some point I could see the file structure of the solution, but I can't find how again. Most operations require me to select a revision, but none are available in the dropdown, and HEAD is not a valid revision for some reason. How do I get the actual source files I need?
The idea is to use a commit to:
checkout it (which will create the working tree)
create a local branch
See How can I switch my git repository to a particular commit:
git checkout -b new_branch 6e559cb
That commit would be the "start point revision" mentioned by Adrian Shum in his answer.
Then please checkout (git checkout) to have your working copy.
You can provide the start point revision to checkout.