I'm trying to get an install of Mercurial setup at work to evaluate it with our legacy code. The "server" I'm currently using is simply a desktop running Windows XP with SP3 on our intranet. The "client" install is on my local desktop, also running Windows XP with SP3. (I'm also using TortoiseHG on both machines.)
The web server is running at http://localhost:8000, and I can view the repository in a browser. But, when I try to detect outgoing changes to the repo, I get an HTTP 404 error. I can see the request show up in the server's log, so I'm pointing to the right location, but it shows GET http://host:8000/reponame?cmd=capabilities HTTP/1.1 404. No matter what settings I change, I can't seem to get the client to successfully execute a command against the repo. Does anyone have an idea why this wouldn't be working?
I have a similar setup, and I had similar problems.
I use the following command to run my HG serve (it's in a batch file):
hg.exe serve --prefix mercurial --address 123.12.1.1 --port 8008 --web-conf hg-web.conf --accesslog hg-access.log --errorlog hg-error.log
In the hg-web.conf I have:
[web]
style = default
allow_push = *
push_ssl = false
[paths]
my-repo = c:\hg\my-repo
With this setup, I can access my repository by accessing url http://ip:port/mercurial/my-repo
I can push without a problem.
Try this setup and I hope it helps you resolve your problem.
Well, when I start internal server in my TortoiseHG (for single repo, Repostory - Start Web-server from Workbench main menu)
Server window tells 'Running on localhost:8000', but really server listens on all interfaces (netstat -na shows TCP 0.0.0.0:8000 0.0.0.0:0 LISTENING)
On clone-edit-commit in fork and testing outgoing (from THG directly) I see
% hg --repository Z:\clone outgoing http://10.1.14.94:8000/
comparing with http://10.1.14.94:8000/
searching for changes
changeset: 39:c57a9357ec55
tag: tip
user: I
date: Fri Mar 08 17:00:05 2013 +0600
summary: Test-change
Some times ago I also pulled|pushed from|to these Mercurial repos from my another host. Server config is trivial and all was done inside TortoiseHG settings.
My [web] section in mercurial.ini (and nothing more)
[web]
port = 8000
encoding = UTF-8
allow_archive = bz2, gz, zip
style = gitweb
(push disabled now, work in pull-only mode)
PS: TortoiseHg version 2.7.1 on Windows XP SP3
Push means to move a changeset from one repo to another. You haven't stated that you made two separate clones of the repo, then try to push from A to B. So let's assume you're confused here, and talk about that confusion: Imagine I try to push from my own repo to an hg serve instance running against my own repo. That's like trying to phone myself to tell myself something.
Secondly, if you're really trying to push from A to B, and there really are changes in A that need to get to B, then, your actual problem is probably that you haven't got the URL of the repository input correctly into your GUI tool, which is Tortoise HG, I assume. Try it again from the command line while you're learning. If you get an error post the error here: hg push http://myserver:8000
The first time I tried Mercurial, after a long history of using Subversion, I had come to think I needed a "server" component more than I actually did. In subversion the server is where commits happen. IN mercurial, commits happen locally, and when you push to the remote (perhaps central) server, then the other people on your team see your changes. This is the big difference. I asssume you're trying to push, because commits happen locally. If you're confused about the difference between a commit and a push, then I suggest you look at http://hginit.com/
As far as setting up a server, there are three fairly easy options I can recommend:
"hg serve" from the commandline, as shown by other answers. Easy, and for temporary use only. Perfect for learning.
Install Mercurial inside Apache (easier than installing Mercurial inside IIS) for a permanent web-server with full authentication and perhaps encryption. If you use hgwebdir instructions on the Mercurial wiki it should take you about an hour. If you use the pre-built solutions, it should take much less time. I used Bitnami's pre-built solutions for windows and got one up in 5 minutes recently. Bitnami makes available installers that will get python, apache, mercurial, and other stuff, all installed and working together in what they call a "stack" (bunch o stuff that already works).
Here's the really brilliant solution. Use the free private web repositories at BitBucket.org. Free for public (open source) and private (small teams and personal) use, and quite cheap for large teams. Admin effort for you? No more than logging into a website. And you're done.
Related
I'm currently helping to maintain a project for a client remotely. I'm the only developer ergo some of my unorthodox approaches/thinking.
the problem
The client is using Visual Studio 2010 + Team Foundation Server for their source control. I am working on a Mac over VPN and have tried several approaches to make committing to their TFS workable. I've tried TFS plugin for Eclipse with no luck (VPN really hoses the connection to TFS). Currently I am having to do a full "checkout for edit" through a virtual machine to the TFS, then transferring the project over the VPN to overwrite those files. Not a sustainable solution to say the least.
the solution?
I'm wondering if there is a way to:
get a list of changed files from GIT (I think this is the solution
(How to list all the files in a commit?)
then use that list as a means to go in and fetch those file, maintaining their folder structure
from there I can do my dump over
VPN into the VM that has the project mapped in TFS.
Or if there is something I've overlooked or hadn't thought of, please do recommend them, I'm all ears.
First, I'm assuming you are running the VM on or near the TFS server, not on your Mac. If not, you can just share a directory using VMware/VirtualBox and edit away on your Mac...
It sounds like you could achieve what you want with plain old Git. If you:
Create a bare repository on the VM (git init --bare)
Add a post-receive hook to copy the files from the master branch (for example) into the TFS directory, overwriting merrily (http://git-scm.com/book/en/Customizing-Git-Git-Hooks)
Initialise your local copy of the source as a Git repository (git init)
Add the remote repository. Assuming it's a Windows box you can use an SMB shared folder over the VPN so your remote is "local" as far as Git is concerned. (git remote add tfsserver file:///Volumes/tfsmount/code
Your first push will be expensive (but you could prepopulate the remote repo to get around that), but subsequent pushes would be just the changesets. The post-receive hook would then take care of updating the files, and you're laughing.
Of course, you then get to impress them with how amazing Git is, get them to migrate, and your problem goes away forever :).
Update: Here's a link which describes these steps in more detail, under the guise of updating a remote website: http://toroid.org/ams/git-website-howto.
Ive been programming for a little while now and have built a little application which is now hosted on a dedicated server.
Now i have been rolling out different versions of my app with no real understanding on how to manage the process properly.
Is this the proper way to manage a build of an application when using a product like git hub ?
Upload my entire application onto github.
Each time i work on it, download it and install it on my dev server.
When im done working on it and it appears to be ok, do i then upload the changed files with the current project i am working on or am i meant to update the entire lot or am i mean to create a new version of the project?
once all my changes are updated, is there anyway of pushing these to a production machine from git hub or generating a listing of the newly changed files so i can update production machine easily with a checklist of some kind ?
My application has about 900 files associated with it and is stored in various folder structures and is a server based app (coldfusion to be precise) and as i work alone majority of the time, im struggling to understand how to manage the development of an app...
I also have no idea on using the command line and my desktop machine is a mac, with a VM running all my required server apps (windows server 2012, MSSQL 2012 etc)
I really want to make sure i can keep my dev process in order, but ive struggled with how to understand how to manage a server side apps development when im using a mac my dev machine is a windows machine i feel like im stuck in the middle.
You make it sound more complicated than it is.
Upload my entire application onto github.
Well, this is actually 2 steps: First, create a local git repo (git init), then push your repo up to github.
Each time i work on it, download it and install it on my dev server.
Well, you only need to "download" it once to a new dev box. After that, just git pull (or git fetch depending on workflow), which ensures any changes on the server are pulled down. Just the deltas are sent.
Git is a distributed version control system. That means every git repo has the full history of the entire project. So only deltas need to be sent. (This really helps when multiple people are hacking on a project).
When im done working on it and it appears to be ok, do i then upload the changed files with the current project i am working on or am i meant to update the entire lot or am i mean to create a new version of the project?
Hmm, you are using fuzzy terminology here. When you are done editing, you first commit locally (git add ...; git commit), then you push the changes to github (git push). Only the deltas are sent. Every commit is "a new version" if you squint.
Later on, if you want to think in terms of "software releases" (i.e. releasing "version 1.1" after many commits), you can use git tags. But don't worry about that right away.
once all my changes are updated, is there anyway of pushing these to a production machine from git hub or
generating a listing of the newly changed files so i can update production machine easily with a checklist of some kind ?
Never manually mess around with files manually on your server. The server should ONLY be allowed to run a valid, checked-out version of your software. If your production server is running random bits of code, nobody will be able to reproduce problems because they aren't in the version control system.
The super-simple way to deploy is to do a git clone on your server (one time), then git pull to update the code. So you push a change to github, then pull the change from your server.
More advanced, you will want something like capistrano that will manage the checkouts for you, and break up "checking out" from "deploying" to allow for easier rollback, etc. There may be windows-specific ways of doing that too. (Sorry, I'm a Linux guy.)
For work all my code must be hosted locally, which rules out using something nice like GitHub. However, I really want to be able to use XCodes Git functionality.
Is it possible to host the repository locally and have multiple computers push and pull from it? I have a server available but it runs Windows 08 so I'm not real keen to making that work
Any *nix machine that runs a SSH server can easily host a Git repo with push/pull access. All someone needs to be able to do is log in and reach the files, and they can clone and pull. Write access, and they can push. (You're going to want a bare repo if you want it to accept pushes, though. Otherwise, things get all kinds of wonky. Less error-prone would be to provide a way for people request that you pull from their repo, but that requires that each person host a Git repo. If that's not really an option, then next best would be to let everybody push to a bare repo.)
Git will also work over HTTP, and it's allegedly easy to set up Apache to host a repo. I've actually had a lot of success with SSH, though. It seems even easier to set up to me; all the server needs is an sshd, (almost certainly) Git, and appropriate user accounts.
Also note, if you don't need to share, then Git already does everything you need on its own, offline. All the above stuff only applies if you want other people to be able to pull from (and possibly push to) you.
You can run git or svn right on your machine. Just set up a local repository. Note that mac os x has unix under the hood.
I have a codebase on a remote Linux server (in my private home directory). I am traveling and my internet connection is spotty, so I'd like to download the code locally, work on it, and then push changes to the server. Since I'm already managing the codebase with Bazaar, seems like that's the logical tool to use for this task as well. I downloaded Bazaar for Windows, and tried creating a branch, but can't figure out what location to enter in the "From" field. My first guess was to do it the way I do with scp, where I enter:
username#host.com/subfolder-with-code
But that didn't work. Also, where do I enter my password?
I think you just needed to add the protocol to that your url:
bzr branch bzr+ssh://username#host.com/subfolder-with-code
should do the trick.
See bzr help urlspec for more info.
I have a client who's host doesn't allow shell access. Is there any multi-user revision control system that can work in that situation (on linux)? He's reluctant to switch hosts.
Yes, because you don't do development directly on the production server! The content of your production server is just a view of your source repository, which is kept elsewhere so that work can be done on a separate dev server. This way, a stupid mistake on the dev server won't hose your production system. If that means doing a manual checkout to transfer the files, so be it.
Not the answer you're looking for, but get a better hosting provider. Is there something special your hosting provider is doing for you that makes you want to put up with no shell access, or even not just preinstalling SVN for you? There's a ton of really good hosts for really cheap that will give you SVN already installed, and shell access.
I use Bazaar for exactly this reason. If the server supports ftp or ftps, it supports Bazaar.
http://bazaar.canonical.com/
I've been looking for the same thing, I have a no-shell-access hosting provider with no included source control and don't want to change.
Currently, I'm using git. But instead of using git push to update the remote repository, I use a script and FTP to update the server's copy.
git pull works normally from any client, if the ftp git directory is accessible over http.
git push replacement:
git update-server-info
perl ftpsync.pl -v .git ftp://ftp.example.com/gitrepo/project.git
ftpuser=user#example.com ftppasswd=*
That's using ftpsync, from the Sourceforge ftpsync page. It's an imperfect replacement for git's push, it mirrors the local repo, instead of merging it with the remote, so make sure the local repo is up to date with git pull first.
git-ftp purports to do the same thing. Github's git-ftp page. Probably works better than ftpsync, because it's designed for the purpose, but I haven't tried it.
Sure, SVN can have multiple users and multiple repositories. Depending of course on whether your host is willing to install it. If that doesn't work, maybe you'd consider hosting your version control somewhere else?
Do you mean that you want to store your version control repository on the host and then access it from multiple clients? If yes, then all modern version control systems can work like that.
I just posted this answer on a Mercurial specific question, but it applies here too. I use Mercurial and I found a guide that let me install it with only FTP/control panel access (no shell).
http://javadocs.wordpress.com/2010/04/27/set-up-mercurial-1-5-1-on-a-shared-host-simplified/