When I choose "update from master", it creates a merge commit. I'd rather just have it re-base. Is this possible?
It does not appear that feature is currently included in GitHub desktop. What I normally do is click on the repository name in the drop-down menu in the top left and then click on "open in terminal". Then just follow the instructions here.
Update:
If you add this to your .gitconfig, GitHub desktop should rebase according to here.
[pull]
rebase = true
Second Update:
GitHub desktop 2.0 now supports rebasing built in! It is under the branch section of the top menu or you can use the shortcut ⇧⌘E
As #Taraz commented on the question, GitHub Desktop now has the option built in.
Branch > Rebase current branch
It's below the Update from master option
Using rebase instead of merging branches results in an easier to follow but less exact history of commits. Your team should agree under what circumstances you should rebase a branch. You should still always merge branches into the main branch through a pull request.
A suggested approach is to allow rebasing local changes that you have made but haven't shared with others, but to merge once you are sharing changes with others. This avoids trouble with rewriting history while still letting you easily catch up with changes as you develop your code locally.
Ref & Source:
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts/git/tutorial/rebase?tabs=visual-studio#when-to-rebase-vs-merge
https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/vsts/git/tutorial/pulling?tabs=visual-studio#update-your-branch-with-the-latest-changes-from-master
No. There was a feature request on their GitHub issue tracker for exactly this option a year ago, for which the response was
This idea is interesting for the future, but this is beyond the scope of our current roadmap.
Since then, another feature request, which is still open, has also been posted.
Related
I am learning git and SVN in Xcode 5.
My question:
How should I revert back my previous commit when I commit my code?
Is there a way on a branch to revert back to previous commits?
For example, I commit a state, call it GOODSPOT, then I commit, a few times as my code progresses. Can I easily revert back to GOODSPOT, in a single click ? Or do i have to go through line by line. Similar to going back to an old snap shot ?
https://developer.apple.com/library/ios/documentation/cocoa/conceptual/ProgrammingWithObjectiveC/Conventions/Conventions.html
Here is what you can do
$ git push origin (branch)
You can go back to any commit you want to. Use the command-line interface (also known as Terminal).
As far as I'm concerned every time i try Source Control. It depends on whether you are working with people. I would just go back to the terminal and recommend it.
For versioning in Xcode, I do this:
- in my Developer directory I set up a project folder
- then Duplicate the Outer initial folder Xcode sets up and append its name with a number and two word description of where it's at
- this also duplicates development art, research notes etc
- the inner folder is all XCode cares about, so that one gets untouched
- when the finished app ships, I illustrate its development for proving copyright originality
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
I work mainly on a desktop Mac but also have a laptop Mac that I use when away from the office.
I want to access and work on my latest html, css, php and python files from either computer.
I thought Github was the way to do this but am having a problem understanding the "flow" and I've RTFM! I don't understand whether I should create a Repository on Github first, why when I try to "clone" something it doesn't magically end up on my local computer... where the nice big red button that says "sync" is...
... or whether I should just use the commandline ONLY...
So, if I start on my desktop and create new files, what are the correct steps using git or Github (?) to put those files where they can then be accessed from my laptop and then have the files on my laptop merged back into the ?Github repository so I can then access those files from my desktop.
Thank you all for your replies and answers! The git workflow, for my needs, is now clear.
The workflow presented by wadesworld is concise and was the overview I needed.
However, Michael Durrant's commandline steps filled in that workflow specifically with commandline directives - and I needed that also.
steelclaw and uDaY's answers and responses were important because I did not understand that it did not matter which repo I created first and, adding and committing locally were essential first steps in my workflow.
Specifically, steelclaw's response to one of my response questions provided the closure I needed, so I could learn more:
After initializing the repository, be sure to use 'add' and 'commit.' These will make the files an official version of the repository. After that, you need to use 'push' to upload it to the remote repository."
ilollar's resource, "Git for Ages 4 and Up" is also worthy of the click, especially for folks like me who are visual!
Thank you all so very much!!
Do you want to version control your files or just have access to the same files in both places?
It is a good idea to use version control as a developer, whether you're writing code or designing websites. But, to do so, you have to have a commitment to learning how version control systems work, since they all have some learning curve.
But, if you're not interested in that complexity and simply want to be sure you have access to the latest version of your files, then you're looking at a file syncing operation which can be much more simple.
So, which one do you want?
Edit: Based on the response, here's the model:
1) Create repository on work computer.
2) Create repository with same name on github.
3) Push to repository on github
4) At home, do a git clone to pull down the changes you pushed.
5) Now that the repository exists in both locations, you can simply do a git push before you leave work, and git pull when you get home, and vice-versa when going the other direction.
To answer the detail of your question: I'd go with Dropbox.
UbuntuOne is also good even for non Ubuntu users and of course Google drive is the (big) new player on the block.
They compare as follows:
Service Free*1 NextLevel*1 NextLevel($)*2 Features
Dropbox 2 50 $2.5O One Folder, best gui sync tools.
UbuntuOne 5 20 $4.00 Multiple directories anywhere
GDrive 5 25 $2.50 It's Google.
*1 GB
*2 Cost per month
To answer the title of your question:
If you wanted something that's more suited to programmers, I'd use git:
First, install gitx (linux readers, that's gitg) as that is by far the most popular gui for git:
For the "flow" I can also refer you to my write-up of various features at:
What are the core concepts of git, github, fork & branch. How does git compare to SVN?
Using gitx or gitg the specific flow is as follow:
1) Make some changes to files.
2) Use the tools "commit" tab to see what's changed ("unstaged"):
3) Add a file by dragging it from "unstaged" to "staged":
4) Give a commit message
5) Commit the file.
6) I then push it to the remote at the command line with $ git push remote or I use the gui by right clicking and select ing the 2nd master - see here:
.
If I'm sharing with others I'll often need to do git pull to get ands merge in others chnages) before being able to do a git push
The github part is doing init and push and clone but I'd say just read up on those tutorials more rather than an SO question. Basically though, I do:
Set up repository locally in git:
git init
git add .
git commit "Initial commit"
Set up github:
Create a github repository using github (https://help.github.com/articles/create-a-repo)and then push your local repository to it as in:
git push origin master.
If the repository already exists on github but not on your local pc, that's wheh you click the remote link and then in a terminal type git clone [paste here, e.g. ctrl-v]
If you're "starting" with github:
Make code changes
git pull - get latest version into your repository and merge in any changes
git add . Add all modified files
git commit -m "message"
git push # origin master is the default.
If, at the end of the day you decide to go with something simple like Dropbox you can use my referral link -http://db.tt/pZrz4t3k- to get a little more than the standard 2GB, Using this we both get an extra 0.5 GB, however which of all these routes to go is up to you and your needs. I use all these services (git, github, UbuntuOne, Dropbox and googleDrive, so I am not recommending one over the others -it depends on the needs).
I would recommend using DropBox or Google Drive. They will let you do EXACTLY what you are trying to achieve, they are very user friendly (and free [5 Gb I think]).
They automatically update (as long as you have an internet connection obviously)
Just make a folder, put some files in it, and you are away.
Since explaining how to use an entire VCS in one answer is an overwhelming task, I can instead point you in the direction of some very helpful resources to get you to understanding and using Git:
Pro Git - a free online book (written with Git!) with easy language on all things Git.
GitHub Help - GitHub's own help section walks you through setting up and using Git, and not just with their own apps. Very useful.
Get Started with Git - A good tutorial getting you up and running with Git.
Git For Ages 4 and Up - Fantastic video explaining the inner-workings of Git with Tinker Toys. Not best for an introduction into Git, but a great video to watch once you feel a bit more comfortable.
Git may feel complicated or strange at first, but if what you are looking for is a good version control system, it is excellent.
However, if all you're looking for is a cloud-like service to sync some files across multiple computers, like the others have mentioned, Dropbox would be the way to go.
I use Github as a "hub" of git, to share finished codes. (And Git for version control)
And Dropbox to sync files between different computers and mobile/tablet, to manage files.
http://db.tt/EuXOgGQ
They serve different purposes for me. Both are good!
Git is an advanced and rather difficult tool to use for version control. If you're feeling brave, you can try to install the command line tool, however I recommend using a graphical client, specifically SourceTree.
http://www.atlassian.com/software/sourcetree/overview
You'll need to clone your repository, or else initialize a new one. To connect to your repository, you'll need to know the URL, and possibly a username and password for your repository. You also need to provide a valid name for the repository.
To update files there are several steps: First, you need to add the changes to the directory. Source tree might do this automatically. Then you need to commit the changes. This is basically confirming changes and signing them with a comment. To upload them, you need to use push and select the correct remote repository. When you want to update your local repository, you'll need to use pull and again select the correct remote repository.
For your purposes, however, it seems like dropbox might be better, because it automatically updates and is very simple. If you don't need the advanced version control that git provides (e.g. branching, merging from many users), then it seems like it would be a better option for you.
https://www.dropbox.com/
This question already has answers here:
Closed 11 years ago.
Possible Duplicate:
Git GUI.. stage everything
My employer is finally looking into setting up some source control after much pleading by all of the developers. Unfortunately, none of our developers, inclusive of myself, have ever done much with source control. I've looked into SVN and thought that would be fine but another of the developers didn't like it. I've moved on to looking at GIT as an option. I've downloaded the GIT GUI from http://git-scm.com and started tinkering with it which brings me to my question/problem.
The web application we're trying to add to source control (GIT) is 7,386 files and 712 folders. When doing the initial commit, from what I understand, I've got to click on each file I want to commit to move it from the Unstaged Changes to Staged Changes pane. Well obviously I am hesitant to sit and click 7,386 times (once for each file to commit). Is there another faster way to do this?
I'm currently using this page as my reference to learn to use the GIT GUI http://nathanj.github.com/gitguide/tour.html. If anyone has a better tutorial/reference for using the GIT GUI I'd much appreciate linking me to it.
Thanks
To add every file (that is not ignored), use
cd /path/to/workspaceRoot
git add .
I don't use any gui, but I think this should be possible by adding a directory (the root directory in this case).
Remember to create a appropriate .gitignore file before, so no unwanted files get added. You can check, what is (un)staged with
git status
Also, there should be a context option (or something like that) in your gui, that provides status.
Extra: Additional git resource (quite good imo) http://progit.org/
From Git-GUI select all files in the "Unstaged changes" list and select "Commit->Stage to commit" in the menu.
If you're not afraid of the command line, try this tutorial instead. It's a detailed walkthrough of beginning git in 10 parts and ends with a Git reference card to help you go further. The free Pro Git book is also much applauded.
Using TortoiseGit (I'm trying to avoid command line usage) how does one delete all commits that accended from a certain commit, and "get back in the past" (example usage: continued doing something, figured I didn't like where it was going, and decided to go "back" disregarding all in between).
In short I wish to go 5 commits "back", and delete them afterwards.
Go to TortoiseGit -> Show log. Select the most recent commit you want to keep, everything above will be erased. Then right click on it and select "Reset "master" to this" and choose Hard. Be careful though because once you do this all the commits after it will be forever lost unless they are stored off in another branch somewhere.
I've never used Tortoise anything (unless you count the electronica group), but I'll give you this info in case you don't find a way to do it with the GUI or you end up deciding to go CLI after all.
As #Tuxified mentions, you can accomplish this with git reset --hard <COMMIT>. You need to specify a commit, which can be done in any of an intimidating panoply of possible ways; the most common have forms like HEAD~4, which specifies a commit 4 commits before the head of the current branch, and deadbeef42, which specifies a commit whose SHA1 starts with 0xdeadbeef42. If you're running linux or OSX, you can get the full details on commit specifiers via man git-rev-parse, under "SPECIFYING REVISIONS".
You can also rename the current branch (git branch -m new_branch_name) and then create a new branch with its head at the place you want to revert to. The advantage is that if you end up wanting to use all or some of the stuff you did there, you can still readily access it; and if you typo the commit, you're saved from a big holycrap moment. Plus git branches are super lightweight so the only real downside is that there will be another branch listed. To make the new master branch you would use git branch master <COMMIT>, and then you check it out. So the net effect here is the same as the first option, except that you still have your old changes saved in the branch new_branch_name. You can even merge those changes back in later, after new commits to master, if you feel like it.
Note that either of these techniques are considered "rewriting history" and will cause issues if you're sharing your repo with others. If you're being smart and pushing to a backup repo in cloud city or another pc, you will have to fix things on that end before you can push to it again.
This is probably way more info than you need right now, but if you end up using git a lot you'll probably want to learn this stuff at some point. Sorry I don't know how to use Tortoise...