I want to use Git for some personal projects I work on. I'm new to git and don't know how to start...
Should I first create the project (say an ASP.NET MVC application) in Visual Studio and then turn the folder that is created into a repository, or should I create a repository first and then create the project inside that folder?
Also, are there any best-practises for how to structure the folders inside the "repository root folder"?
These are my two questions right now, but any pointers to articles etc for best-practises using Git and Visual Studio are welcome!
Git repositories are so lightweight that it doesn't really matter whether you create the project and then create the repo or create the repo and add the folders. You will anyway be doing a git add and git commit after the folders have been created.
But, for me, I usually create the project from VS and restructure the folders so that at the root there is the src folder and the .sln and project files are within the src folder. VS would typically create the root folder with the project name which I rename to src. Then I create the repo, add the standard .gitignore and .gitattributes and commit the repo.
See my preferred structure here: https://github.com/manojlds/cmd
Of course, you can have whatever structure you want.
For using in VS you can use Git extensions. It integrates into the IDE and provides nice GUI over the basic Git operations.
As for the folder structure, it depends so much on the project, so no answer can be given here. There's no better practice than organizing based on the way you work!
As for the moment of repo creation, just create it as early as possible, so I'd say first create it and then add your project.
Organize your files and folders however makes since to your project and workflow, git doesn't care how the files are organized.
Since Visual Studio complains when I try to create a project in an existing folder, I follow the following steps.
Create a bare remote repository.
Clone empty repository locally.
add .gitignore, etc. and make initial commit.
Create VS project in a different folder.
Then I do one of the following.
copy the files from the .git repository into the VS solution folder -- which changes the location of the local repo.
close VS, copy solution files to local repository and then reopen VS.
I really should take the time to automate it, but I spend more time working on existing projects than starting anew so it hasn't been much of an annoyance yet.
I've tried all the visual git tools, including those that integrate with VS, but always end up using PowerShell instead -- just a matter of preference. Give them a try, they may work well with your workflow.
Related
Note: I am relatively new to Git / GitHub. I understand my way around, but I am confused with this corner case
Background
I created an IntelliJ color scheme git repo and pushed it to github online. The directory structure was ad hoc and made up of only output. This was actually fine and worked well.
I noticed that people would not get updates from me this way, and decided to create a JetBrain Repo plugin. This also works well; however, my github location and plugin location on my PC are different.
Issue
I looked over Change Git repository directory location. but was not sure if this fit my usecase.
Since my github is just output files and my plugin files are all input files, can I simply just copy over my .git files (along with README files and such) , and expect it to work correctly?
The linked SO question seems to relate to JUST moving the same directory structure and files over to another location. I am dealing with different directory structure, different files, and directory location; however, it IS the same project.
Update
Before, my workflow was:
Modify Color Scheme in IDE
Export settings from IntelliJ
Place in \Documents\GitHub\ChroMATERIAL
Windows GitHub Client: \Documents\GitHub\ChroMATERIAL merge
GitHub
Now it is
Modify Color Scheme in IDE
Run project and autogenerate output in \IdeaProjects\ChroMATERIAL
Place output in \Documents\GitHub\ChroMATERIAL
Windows GitHub Client: \Documents\GitHub\ChroMATERIAL merge
GitHub
What I want
Modify Color Scheme in IDE
Run project in \IdeaProjects\ChroMATERIAL
Windows GitHub Client: \IdeaProjects\ChroMATERIAL merge
GitHub
I'm assuming that the generated output matches the structure you need for your Github repository. If so you could easily move your .git folder from
\Documents\Github\ChroMATERIAL
to
\IdeaProjects\ChroMATERIAL
What you should check:
Will the generated output directory be cleared if you clean the project into Intellij? If so you should stick to your current workflow since you could easily delete your local copy.
The other thing which could be a problem is the Github Desktop Client since I don't know how it behaves nor how or if it must be configured in a special way to reflect your changes. (if you just call it from the inside of the repository it should not be a problem at all)
For your explanation:
Git uses relative paths. So it is irrelevant where the repository lives inside your system. The important part is the structure inside the repository since this will be cloned to the remote repository.
I recommend that you copy your .git folder rather than move it. If something goes wrong you can easily revert.
I am currently working on a project which is included in a versions(svn)repository. Although I'm not sure, I think I might have changed some settings in Xcode, affecting the way the source control saves the build folder in the repository. I was told it is a bad practice to commit the build folder, and asked why have I done that, but I had no answer at the moment. A screen will elucidate this more clear:
Even if I tried to delete (or ignore) those files from the repository, they are still created after I build the project. How should I proceed in order to prevent those build folders appear in versions' project tree?
Adding versioned folder to ignore-pattern does not affect data in SVN
You must ignore and remove folder from SVN, but keep it locally
For CLI it will be svn pe ... in the parent of build folder and svn rm build --keep-local (I don't know XCode GUI's equivalents)
Apple has introduced a new project-related type of file in Xcode 5: "xccheckout".
This file is located in the ".xcodeproj/project.xcworkspace/xcshareddata/" directory, and it seems that it is related to the project's version control system.
An example file is here: http://pastebin.com/5EP63iRa
I suppose that this type of file should be ignored under VCS, but I'm not sure.
So here are the questions:
Should "xccheckout" be ignored?
What is its purpose?
You should check in an Xcode 5 .xccheckout file; in general, files in xcshareddata should be committed.
An .xccheckout file contains metadata about what repositories are used in a workspace. For a single project in a single repository that doesn't make much difference. But if you're using a workspace that has multiple projects from different repositories, the presence of an .xccheckout file in the workspace allows Xcode to know what all of the components that make up a workspace are and where to get them.
The *.xccheckout file contains VCS metadata, and should therefore not be checked into the VCS.
On the other hand: checking in this file will probably not create merge difficulties or other problems.
If you want to ignore this file (which I recommend) you should add this line to your project's .gitignore:
*.xccheckout
Abizern's solution will not work for projects inside a workspace. Because, when you use a workspace, the path to the *.xccheckout file will be: <workspace-name>.xcworkspace/xcshareddata/<workspace-name>.xcchekout. And it actually ignores more than you would want.
Edit:
This file exists for managing Xcode's knowledge of the possibly many VCS systems in your project, see Chris Hanson answer. For > 99% of the projects the .xccheckout file is configuration overkill.
It depends. The file contains references to the remote repository you are using. If you are using a centralized VCS such as Perforce or Subversion, everyone's remote repository will be the same and so you can and should check the file in.
If you are using a distributed VCS such as Mercurial or git, but using it as though it were a CVCS (in other words, everyone cloned from a shared repository directly to their personal workspace on their machine) then you still might want to check it in.
However, if you are using a DVCS with everyone having their own remote clone, for example using GitHub in it's standard usage pattern, you DO NOT want to check this file in. If you did then your Pull Requests will be asking for your repository settings to get copied into everyone else's xccheckout file, but your repository settings will be different from everyone else's because you are all using different remote repositories.
Yes, the Project.xccheckout file should be committed to your repository. Xcode uses this file to tell others who open the workspace the entire list of source control repositories used by the workspace and the location of the working copy relative to the workspace, whether those repositories are Git, SVN, or both.
When you open the workspace, Xcode uses the Project.xccheckout file to notify the user that there are other repositories forming part of the workspace, and asks which should be checked out. When checking out additional repositories, Xcode places the working copies in the same workspace-relative folder structure as they were when the Project.xccheckout file was generated.
As Chris Hanson said, it probably doesn't matter for a single-repository, one-project workspace, but for more complex affairs it'll be very handy indeed.
You can find out more about this in the WWDC 2013 session video Understanding Source Control in Xcode; the relevant portion starts at about 15 minutes.
This is what I have in my .gitignore for Xcode.
#Xcode
*.xcuserstate
project.xcworkspace/
xcuserdata/
It keeps anything that relates to the local state of the way the projects looks for me out of the repository.
The xccheckout file is under here so it is not tracked on my system by default.
Xcode has gotten better and separating out what needs to be shared and what needs to be kept locally. For example; these lines will ignore the default build schemes, which is fine because you can mark specific build schemes as shared, and they are put in a directory that is not ignored.
Breakpoints are ignored, but you can mark specific breakpoints as being shared across projects and they are also placed in a directory that is not ignored.
This is about outdated repo details inside XCode. The case is:
I'm reusing a supporting library from an old project in a new one.
I used "Add files to X project..." functionality to copy them to the new place.
"Automagically" the files were copied with a reference to an old SVN repo, that don't exit anymore.
So... Now I have a project with 2 repos visible, incl. one inactive. I can't commit changes to copied files, as the old repo is still linked.
Two question here:
Is there a way to edit old repo data?
Is there a way to move the copied files to the new repo, where the rest of the project is?
Ultimately I need to commit both parts ;)
Thank you.
OK. So resolving this issues required several steps to be performed. Not sure if all were required, but the eventually I got it right.
Commit all changes you can (in my case all but the folder that was linked with the old repo). Archive your projects.
Go to the root folder of your project and use svn switch --relocate command to merge repos. Details: how to change svn settings
Remove the project from XCode (via Organizer) delete the entire project folder
Remove repos in the Organizer
Fetch whatever was committed in the SVN again. Do that and create a new project. If you see any missing files highlighted in red, like my folder that couldn't be committed, delete it.
Manually add the missing files / folder that to the project, from a local copy.
Now you can commit to the repo!
Tiresome, like most things in XCode... ;)
We develop with Visual Studio 2010 (in C#) and migrated a while ago from SVN to GIT. Now we try to split up our repository (which is quite big - ~30.000 files) to many git repositories - one for each solution.
The solutions share some projects, mostly libraries we develop in-house and like to add to from all the solutions.
The new repositories have a flat layout. One subdirectory for each project (shared projects are submodules).
In the big old repo, the projects are in a tree structure.
The Problem occurs with external references in the submodules. In the new repos, the path to a referenced project may be "......libs\someproject", while in the new layout the correct path would be "..\someproject".
We already had some edit wars concerning this and are not keen on more.
Half-baked Solutions I could think of:
use "Reference Paths" in ...csproj.user and exclude this file from version control (has to be redone for each developer and after each reopsitory cleanup)
use branches for each situation and try to teach everyone where "real" commits should go and where "environment-change" commits should go (submodules are already not the simplest concept...)
embed binaries instead of the submodules (but what about developing changes to the submodules? what about different log4net versions?)
Does anyone know of a sane solution?
Since you are asking for a sane solution, I can only advise you to look into setting up your own NuGet service (look at http://www.MyGet.org for inspiration)
http://nuget.codeplex.com/
IF you go down the route of package management, consider OpenWrap. However, embedding the package management artefacts in source code is a bad idea. You can use such tools to update what is actually stored in submodules, but don't rely on them at build time. Expect the binaries to be there from the point of view of your build scripts.
So if I understand you correctly, the problem is with Visual Studio and not with Git? If that's the case, use the old tree structure that worked with Visual Studio. Make your submodules structure a tree structure too. So the top of the tree would be one super repo whose sub modules (the branches) would have submodules of their own, until you get down to the leaves of your tree. It would be a pain to setup at first, but it should just work.
Use one submodule to house all "common libraries". Just one level. But you should move the common libraries as services with well defined contracts. This way you can incrementally rollout new versions with no down time. This way you only have a submodule in each that holds the contracts. These could be interfaces or messages.
I have a similar problem using VS 2013.
I want to use git-svn instead of SVN directly. SVN has a gigantic set of directories. I could not create a single git-repository that would contain all of our trunk folder. Git-always exited with an error and the repository was corrupted. I worked around the problem by doing as follows:
Using git-svn, I cloned the subset of folders off SVN/trunk that I needed by creating one git-repository per folder.
Created a local parent git repository that contains all my git-svn-cloned folders.
Each git-repository was added as a sub-module to the parent git-repository.
The problem with Visual Studio is that it does not recognize the multiple projects outside the main project where I opened the solution. This solution is in a folder that contains the only files recognized by Visual Studio as being under git-source control.
I tried setting the git-preferences to use the upper level parent directory as the location of the git-repostitory without noticing any difference.