I have an Xcode project and I'm working with a team.
I have re-organized the files and set all the correct settings to build properly. After that, I committed to the repo and asked my teammates to pull/update and continue working on it.
However, we found that the organization of files and build settings were not reflected in my teammates' computer when they opened the same project in Xcode.
I guess it is because Xcode saves each folder/file organization and settings specific to the user (in the xcuserdatad file?). So, how do I get my team's settings/preferences to be synchronized with mine? What is the best practice?
You ask for best practices, which is a little too close to opinion for Stack Overflow sometimes, but I think this could be regarded as best practice:
Git ignore file for Xcode projects
In particular, if you are excluding from the repo any files beyond that list, that's what you should look at first.
Normally, the problem people are encountering is that things that are user-specific have made it into the repo, whereas what you're saying is that you feel there are things that are project-related that should be reflected on all the computers of all repo users, where you are not seeing this.
You likely need to be more specific about what you are and are not seeing synchronised on the two computers. For instance, if it is just whether a folder is in a collapsed or expanded state, I would definitely say that you should not want this to be synchronised over to other computers. You also mention about being able to build. If you cannot get the project to build, it is likely you may be having issues with provisioning profiles. What do the specific build error messages say?
Related
I just moved my Xcode projects to iCloud Drive to see if I could work on them across computers. So far, everything works perfectly… except git. I can't pull up the history and trying to commit gives me an error like this:
I've heard many people say that iCloud Drive is problematic and I should use GitHub, but I'm already paying for iCloud and literally all my other files are in there. That isn't to say I wouldn't be open to switching, but I'd like to know why these errors are occurring so I can make an informed decision.
Okay, I'm just spitballing here, but is there any chance it's looking for Asset.xcassets in the wrong Slidefari folder? I notice that your project folder is called Slidefari, and so is the parent of the Asset.xcassets folder.
It's been a while since I had to use XCode, and by "use" I mean "tear my hair out over," and I've only ever used GitHub for CVS, but maybe changing the name of the project folder will remove one variable? (And probably break your project BECAUSE SOFTWARE DESIGN, AMIRITE???)
Hope this helps!
Judging based on the fact that the repository works fine on the computer which it was created on, it sounds to me like some sort of git authentication issue.
It depends how your repository authenticates too. Many repo's have you generate an ssh key with keygen and submit that. I'm not 100% certain how that security works, but I'd venture to guess that the certificates and such involved are tied to your computer on a 1:1 basis.
I was thinking about moving my Xcode project to the iCloud drive but I'm concerned about the risks. I'd be curious to know if you found a solution. Thanks.
I'm programming in xcode (actually Phone Gap in conjunction with xcode) with git. I'm having a strange issue. When I create two identical branches and try to check out back and fourth between them with out making any changes git is telling me that I need to commit because a change has been made (this same thing is also resulting in merge conflicts). It says the changed file is:
platforms/ios/Butterfli.xcodeproj/project.xcworkspace/xcuserdata/benpearce.xcuserdatad/UserInterfaceState.xcuserstate
Can anyone explain what's going on and how to deal with it.
Yes, .xcworkspaces are simply files that Xcode uses to describe the workspace or projects.
IMHO, There's no need to check these files in at all, unless you share settings with other folks in your projects (and in your case, I suppose other machines that have a user named "benpearce").
In fact, you can safely add them to your .gitignore file.
More info can be seen here
I'm having an annoying issue with Xcode 5 and the shared schemes.
In my team (we're just two, but hey! it's still a team) we're sharing some Schemes to run the app with different configurations (Debug, QA, Release, ...)
Well now Xcode 5 seems to change the BlueprintIdentifier setting of each scheme based, from what I can understand, on the machine of the developer. And of course the change get's noticed bit git and we either have to checkout them, or commit. Both solution don't make sense...
Any idea on how to fix it? I did a google search but found nothing for Xcode 5...
I don't want to give up on those shared configurations! A solution I can came up with to keep having the shared Schemes tracked is unshared them, copy them in a dedicated test folder, then using a strategy like the one used for the Pods to copy those schemes locally, where Xcode can mess up with them without us noticing. Something like a schemes script that reads a Schemefile file which lists the schemes to copy from the Schemes/ folder, and a Schemefile.lock that is updated every time there's some change and that is read by the Xcode build process in order to make sure everything is up-to-date.
This seems a lot of work for such a tiny thing, so before jumping head down into it I would like to know if anyone has some better solution to propose.
Cheers :)
First, I'm assuming you're using CocoaPods because you mentioned it in your question.
I've had this issue for a while and just recently discovered that some of my shared schemes are not getting their BlueprintIdentifier changed with the others. Upon investigation, I noticed that the untouched schemes had a Pods target under builds that was missing–as in it was listed in red like this: Pods (missing). My theory is that pod install and various Xcode events (i.e. crashing, launching, etc) were causing the scheme to change its BlueprintIdentifiers because they had a reference to a Pod target in the scheme build settings.
I removed the Pods reference in all of my schemes and have not been able to reproduce the BlueprintIdentifierchange since. My target that depends on Pods has libPods.a specified under Link Binary With Libraries in Build Phases and set to required, so it still gets compiled before the main target.
Note that switching between branches with this change and without this change might still produce modifications to the scheme files.
#Wes's answer didn't specifically fix this issue for me, but it did lead me to the right place. The solution for me was to turn "Find Implicit Dependencies" from "off" (unchecked) to "on" (checked) from the Edit Scheme screen for the Scheme that keeps changing.
I hope this qualifies as programming related since it involves how to structure a project.
Because I've always used the web site model with VS.net I never had solution and project files and putting everything into source control worked great. I knew that everything I had in my web site directory was all I needed for the web site.
Now I'm using asp.net MVC and it only has a project model so now I have these solution and project files. If I work on it alone it's fine but once other people start to add/delete files from the project our solution file gets messed up and people end up having to grab the latest solution file, see what got changed and then add back/remove their files and check in the solution file again. It's become sort of a problem because sometimes people don't realize the solution file was changed, they make other changes and then when they check in everything other people do an update on their files they find that their files are gone from the project (although still physically on disk).
Is this normal? Is there a way to structure a project so that we don't need to check in solution and project files?
Your developers are not using TFS correctly. You should have multiple check-outs turned on, and everyone needs to be careful to merge their changes correctly when checking in. TFS will prompt you to do this, and accepting the defaults is nearly always the right thing to do.
It's not uncommon to have one or two developers who never get it, and you might have to help them now and then. But every programmer who works on a team needs to learn how to use source control tools correctly. If they can't manage that, they shouldn't be writing software.
[edit] It occurs to me that you might run into these problems if you check in the *.sln file directly, rather than choosing to "Add Solution to Source Control".
I don't think it's normal - what are you using for source control? It sounds like developers aren't respecting changes that others a making - checking in without merging first.
I know that early on in a project, when lots of files are being added & deleted, it can be a problem to keep up - you need to check out the project file, add your files, then check in the new file & project so other developers can also update it. You'll probably have multiple project files in a solution - perhaps one interim solution would be to have one "holding" project for each developer, then clean them up periodically - though these types of temporary fixes do have a tendency to become permanent.
I don't know of a way to set up a project file that's not in source control, though I suppose you could create a script that would generate them.
Having been through this, the key is respect & good communication between the developers.
This tends to happen with TFS multiple check outs. It can be hard to grasp coming from VSS to TFS as VSS allowed one person to check a file out at one time. Auto-merge should work most of the time for you but a couple of rules should ease the pain:
Check in early and often (if you add remove or rename a file check it in straight away even if it is a blank holder)
Before you check in do a get latest, this will ask you to resolve conflicts locally
Try to get continuous integration set up so that developers always know the state of the buidl and whether it is OK to check in\out.
We had a bit fo pain at the start of our current project but it soon settled down when we followed the rules above.
Personally, I think making changes to project and solution files requires discipline and clear (well understood) rules throughout your development team. These files (.sln, .*proj) are the bottlenecks of your project, and any errors or inconsistencies can cost you in team downtime. Changes need to be well thought out, planned and then executed.
They must be secured by source control (which you're already using, excellent) and your team members should work on the basis of only making the changes they need, and not leaving project or solution files checked out for an extended period.
If you are allowing multiple (shared) checkouts, this could become problematic in terms of overwriting another user's changes. Depending on your source control mechanism, people may be required to manually merge changes. Personally, I'd ask people to negotiate their project/solution changes with each other over merging (this can't always be achieved).
A third option if you are using TFS is the shelve feature. If someone needs to make changes locally, they can shelve the changes and merge later.
Lastly, another strategy is to try to architect your solution to be as modularized as possible - so people are distributed, working on separate projects and do not (ideally) have to overlap on too many common areas.
I'm not sure if you are using TFS, as people have mentioned, but if you are (or if you are using source control with similar capabilities) you can set it such that sln and csproj files are exclusive lockouts and are not able to be merged.
We have done this with quite large teams and while it causes some initial issues as people get used to it in the long run it has resolved many issues that were previously causing problems. Essentially you trade longer term merge issues/complexity for short term compile/checkin issues which we have found to be a good trade off.
Once you have set it to forced exclusive checkout and no merge you then get your dev teams used to the fact they should keep locks on the sln and proj files for as shorter time as possible.
Always check them in.
Always check out latest (merge if possible), make sure your change is there, before checking in a new version.
If your source control doesn't require a special action to check in from an old version, GET A DIFFERENT SOURCE CONTROL.
I just wonder what the best approach is to have multiple users work on a Project in Visual Studio 2005 Professional.
We got a Solution with multiple Class Libraries, but when everyone opens the solution, we keep getting the "X was modified, Reload/Discard?" prompt all the time. Just opening one project is an obvious alternative, but I find it harder to use as you can't just see some of the other classes in other projects that way.
Are there any Guidelines for Team Development with VS2005 Pro?
Edit: Thanks. The current environment is a bit limited in the sense there is only 1 PC with RDP Connection, but that will change in the future. Marking the first answer as Accepted, but they are all good :)
What you need is source control.
You should definitely not open the same files over the network on multiple machines. For one thing, Visual Studio has safeguards in place to prevent you from modifying certain files during a build, but it has none of that that will prevent others from modifying the same files over the network.
By setting up source control, each developer will have a separate copy of the files locally on his or her developer machine, and periodically communicate with the source control system to check in/commit changes. After that, other developers can ask for the latest updates when they're ready to retrieve them.
Use source control to keep a central repository of all your code. Then each user checks out their own copy of the source code and works locally. Then submits only the code that changed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Version_control
A number of people have recommended using source control and I totally agree. However you also need do the following.
Exclude your personal options files from the repository (eg your .suo files)
Exclude your App.config files from the repository. - Not entirely but you need to have a Template.App.config. You commit that instead, and only copy your App.config into the Template.App.config when you make structural changes. That was each user has their own individual config for testing.
There are probably some other files worth excluding (obj directories and so forth) but thats all I can think of right now.
Peter
This might sound snide, but if you're opening up the solution from a shared location then you're doing something wrong. If that's the case then you should start using source control (something like Subversion) and have everyone check out a copy of the project to work on.
However if you're already using source control, then it might be a symptom of having the wrong things checked in. I find that you only need the sln, and the vcproj under source control.
Otherwise I don't know...
You should definitely, definitely be working with source control!
This will help stop the collisions that are occurring. Also, if you are making changes to the shared projects this often that it is a problem, then also ensure that all code is tested before getting checked in (otherwise they may bust someone else's build), but make sure they check in often (or time gained from not dealing with prompts will be lost in merging conflicts) :)