Been searching internet for best practices about this, but could not find any result.
Situation: we would like to have a folder where we do create our dashboards in,
then this would be distributed to other folders for different teams (clients, in our case). The content of these folders is not the same, nor their rights.
What we would like to do is to create something like symbolic link in linux in each of the folders for corresponding dashboards, so when we change one in main folder, it would change in each folder containing that dashboard
If this is not possible, what is the best alternative ?
thx in advance.
Related
I'm evaluating GitHub as a way to keep under version control and share some excel files containing basically financial models.
The issue I'm facing is this one: I need to share the Release artifacts (a bunch of xlsx files) with people outside GitHub, so I'd like to include the version number in the filename to be sure that, even when the files will be further shared by business people through email or other non-GitHub means, that information won't be lost.
Is there a way to rename the artifacts automatically? GitHub Actions seemed to be the right way to address this thing, but unfortunately they're still unavailable on the Enterprise Server my company is using (v 2.19.13, I don't have any administrative access to it, btw), and adding some CI toolchain just to rename some files is probably too much.
Thank you in advance for any response!
Michele
I have a very simple question regarding the general organisation of folders in GitHub.
Because I often forget to commit specific GitHub project, I started to group different projects and folders in large generic folders.
For instance, I would have a general folder called all_projects, and put inside project 1, project 2, and so on. Then I would simply git add . everything at once.
As my general folders getting bigger and bigger, I was wondering if there are major drawbacks to this kind of organisation and how you would do it differently.
I think it's a bad practice to put everything you do in same folder. Not locally, but on Github.
Locally, you can create folder Programming or my_work or all_projects and in there, create projects separately. They also should have a proper name, not just be named. For example, if the project is doing web scraping instagram, name it Instagram web scraper or InstagramScraper or something that when read, almost instantly remember what you did just by reading project(folder) name.
Also, check if the project is large or small.
If this project is something you've built for long, with big project structure and lots of files connected somehow to each other, than you can push it to github with proper name of repo and README.md . It is self contained and it shouldn't be part of some else project that has nothing to do with it.
If small, like one script, or just something you've practiced while learning something, consider using https://gist.github.com . It's connected to your github account and it can hold small scripts.
P.S.
This is my personal opinion.
I would like to know if it is somehow possible to only edit the path to the Shapes folder from the default Tableau Repo.
I know the path to the entire repo can be edited within the software but I am only interested in the Shapes folder.
I would like to have it stored in a shared drive, and eventually doing the same thing with the Preferences.tps file. I don't want to place the entire repo on the shared folder mainly because the datasources folder has some customizations that can't be shared.
Best,
Max
have you tried using a symlink on a mac, or a shortcut on Windows for the Shape folder?
Thank you Alex...
I have a complicated system of folders and I need to share 2nd and 3rd level folders with certain groups of users while maintaining the full path to the folder.
Is this possible? I tried but without success as if I share a folder eg. Project 1->Administration with the "Group Administration" on the client I only see the Administration folder and I need, instead, to replicate the entire structure.
Thanks for the support
With the current ownCloud sharing implementation this is simply not possible. Every shared item appears directly in the "Shared" folder of the user the file/folder is shared with.
Update: At the moment ownCloud (and I guess also nextCloud) allow a user to move around and rename files/folders shared with them. So even if you could enforce a certain structure on your users, they could always change it afterwards.
You could always report a feature request for it (or maybe there even already is one) here: https://github.com/owncloud/core/issues/ .
I am currently working on a project to convert a number of Excel VBA powered workbooks to VSTO solutions. All of the workbooks will share a number of class libraries and third party assemblies, in fact most of the work is done in the class libraries. I currently have my folder structure laid out like this.
Base
Libraries
Assemblies
Workbooks
Workbook1
Workbook2
Each of the workbooks will be its own solution, and the workbook solutions just reference the assemblies in the folder structure. My question is how would you lay out the source control? Would you start the repository at the base? Or would you create a repository for each workbook solution? Would you rearrange the folders?
Now that we have the initial development done, we're about to have a bunch of outside developers come on to the project to helps us convert the rest of the workbooks and I really like the idea of them being able to check out from the base directory and having all of the dependencies ready to go. I also worry that there are other concerns that come with having 20+ solutions/projects under one source control repository.
I want everything to be as simple as possible for people joining the project but I don't want to sacrifice long term usability. In my mind I've been going back and forth, what's simpler one repository or one repository per solution?
I'd appreciate and insight you have, because I'm fresh out.
Additional Information: Currently, I am using Mercurial personally, but the project will probably get moved to StarTeam unless I can make some convincing arguments for something else.
You don't mention in your question what source control you are using. As it doesn't sound like you need to limit your outside developers access to the rest of the repository I would not bother with setting up multiple repositories. I would assume that unless your code runs into the millions of lines size that repository size is not an issue.
It all depends what functionality your revision control system supports. In subversion you can declare other folders as external and provide a file URL for the content of that folder, this will cause subversion to deal with that folder as a separate repository even though it is within your folder structure.