I've fired up an instance of GitHub Enterprise (11.10.272) and created a repository. I've written a pre-receive hook in Ruby which I'd like to use with that repository.
GitHub Enterprise, like regular GitHub, allows the configuration of service hooks. I tried to SSH into the GitHub Enterprise server to create a hook file, but I couldn't find the repo directory. Furthemore, GitHub Enterprise's terms forbid modifying the VM, so I'm not confident this is a great approach.
It seems GitHub:FI supported hooks. The current version of the FI to Enterprise migration tool does not currently support hooks according to Migrating from GitHub:FI.
I know that this is really old, but GitHub Enterprise 2.6 just came out with pre-receive hooks. More information can be learned here: https://help.github.com/enterprise/admin/guides/developer-workflow/using-pre-receive-hooks-to-enforce-policy/.
I'm fairly certain this will perfectly align with the things you are looking for. Hopefully this either helps OP, or anyone else who stumbles upon this later!
Based on my email with GitHub customer support, pre-receive hooks aren't supported for GitHub Enterprise as of May 2013.
We don't have admin access on our GHE box, so we couldn't go in and "fix" this if we wanted to.
They claim that things they do would break if you could reject commits. I assume they mean things like automatic merging of pull requests, but I'm not sure.
They have an extensive set of post-commit webhooks which you could use for post-commit functionality.
I'm looking into building a "pass-through git server" -- basically, poll the GHE API frequently to make a local clone of any repo that exists on certain GHE accounts, and then auto-clone it with custom pre-recieve and post-receive hooks. This would let us clone off the pass-through server, do our pre-receive hooks there, and push approved changes through to GHE. There doesn't seem to be any kind of standard pass-through server for git out there yet, probably because you need to know what repos to clone, which doesn't seem to have a standard git API.
GitHub Enterprise seems to store repostories in /data/repositories. Each repository has hooks generated by a template. I can modify these hooks, but that would surely break something. The template hooks seem to look for hooks in another location, but that location is defined in config and I can't find it.
Related
We have Bitbucket Cloud not Bitbucket Server. Is there a way to modify the "pre-receive" functions on Bitbucket? Goal is to audit pushes to make sure there's no obvious vulnerabilities before the code is available on Bitbucket. Git-hooks might work but there's not really a way to get them into version control in the same repo - the only way I can think of doing that would be to ssh into a Bitbucket server and modify the remote repo but I don't think you can do that?
My only guess is there might be a way to keep the pre-receive hooks in source control by putting the hook somewhere like this in the repo:
.bitbucket/pre-receive
But it's hard to find any info on this online.
Unfortunately, this isn't possible.
The GitHub documentation is talking about GitHub Enterprise Server, a product you would install on your own infrastructure. GitHub as in github.com does not support creating pre-receive hooks at all. This is pretty much the norm amongst the popular cloud git hosting providers - no cloud provider will let you write your own arbitrary code and run it on the same infrastructure that holds your git repo, there's too much danger of you breaking out into other data on the same physical storage.
Until someone develops a safe/sandboxed implementation of server-side hooks, you'll need to find another way.
Full disclosure: I work for Atlassian (though I don't work on Bitbucket Cloud)
I'm looking for a way to automatically mirror my Gitlab repos to Github, on push. I use Gitlab repos as my main repos, and would rather have to push to only one remote. But, I want my code to be browsable on Github also.
I found similar questions on StackOverflow, such as this one.
But the answers are always the same: one should add a custom post-receive git hook to the gitlab repo. This requires a shell access to the server running Gitlab. As I'm hosting a community edition Gitlab for many users, and not only me, they can't have easy access to a shell (and this isn't the most user-friendly way to do this), so it does not fit my needs.
I thought about two ways to implement it:
Either a MirrorOnPush project service, implementing such a git hook in Ruby, as the EmailOnPush project service currently do.
Or use a custom server to clone and push the repo, using a webhook.
The first one seems to be the cleaner to me, but I can't find any doc about Gitlab project service and code structure… On the other hand, the second is a bad and ugly hack, but is almost straightforward.
I'd rather implement a project service to handle it. Do you have any doc or leads on how to write a project service for Gitlab (without having to read all the Gitlab source code, as there seems to be no dev doc…) ?
Thanks !
one should add a custom post-receive git hook to the gitlab repo.
Actually, that was the best solution, up until 7.x GitLab, as I detailed in "Gitlab repository mirroring";
A true project service for repo mirroring is requested, but not voted up enough: suggestion: suggestion 4614663.
The main documentations remains:
the app models project services folder,
the spec models project services folder,
the doc/project_services,
the project services scenarios.
This isn't much, as the OP noted before.
Since it That leaves you with the hack approach.
I am looking for alternatives to NWDI (Stands for Netweaver Development Infrastructure by SAP) source control system for developing
Java EE Applications. Primarily because:
NWDI is not DVCS : So developers have to be online to do just about anything.
User Interface: Its very difficult to use and train developers on using this system.
Tracking Changes/Generating Reports: Very limited support for this.
For example I cant find out what projects (Files within the project) have been changed in the last 2 weeks.
Code Review: You can do code reviews, it has a good diff utility. But thats about it, there is no way to attach code reviews to a change request.
Branching and Merging are extremely painful.
However the current system has a few handy features:
Automatic Builds: No need to write any build scripts , everything is built in. So when a new repository (we call it track)
is created it automatically configures the build based on the type of components (Supported by the repository) selected on creation.
A Central Build is triggered whenever a developer commits (Activates the changes). Irrespective of the status of the build the changes are now inflicted on the entire team.
Automatic push to Central Test Server: While creating a repository you can define all the servers (Central test, QA, Prod). A developer can push his changes by a
click of a button to Central Test Server. Again everything is built in and there is no need to extend any hooks like you have to do in Mercurial.
I was exploring Mercurial, Kiln and but couldn't find anything helpful. For mercurial Hooks can be used to do the same but I guess some customization effort is required.
Are there any cool DVCS like Mercurial which does the above 2 as well or is it something that I have to customize to make it work?
I don't know of a DVCS proposing everything build-in.
The only alternative (not DVCS, but with some of DVCS characteristics in it) is Rational Team Concert or RTC (free for up to 10 developers).
With a DVCS alone, the usual setup for CI and reviews is:
Git
Gerrit (review)
Jenkins (scheduler)
See "Using Gerrit Git Review with Jenkins CI Server"
Looks like there nothing useful out of the box. I am going to try out Kiln as it appears to be easy to use and try customizing it.
Is there a way deploy a website directly from github or cloud9 ide? using ftp or other way, right now it doesn't matter what hosting, just so it'll be fully functional and accessible online.
(I know github has a web-hosting of a kind but it seems very limited)
What webframework/language are you using? If you use RoR or Sinatra or any other rake-based framework you can use heroku.com. If your using asp.net you can use appharbor.com, finally if your using php you can use phpfog.com.
What these hostingproviders have in common is that you deploy the website by pushing your code with git, while you won't be deploying directly from github you can just add one of the above mentioned hosts to your remote-list (in addition to github) and then push to that remote when you wish to deploy.
Another solution would be to add a post-receive-hook to github which then triggers whenever you push to github, in that post-recieve-hook you could tell the webhost to pull from the repo. This does however require you to have git installed on the webserver aswell as some kind of webinterface for the post-recieve-hook to post to.
I've never worked with any version control systems before. Now I'm trying to learn Mercurial, but I'm confused (I've already read about 10-15 articles + hginit.com). I don't know how to organize the workflow.
I have a testing server and a production server. I work from my office computer and from my home laptop. I make changes directly on the testing server, and every week or so copy new code to my production server. I also need wiki/issues/etc. pretty much everything bitbucket.org has. I know that's a bad way of doing things.
Is there any tutorial or articles on how to organize the workflow? I'd also appreciate any schemes/sketches describing the process.
Thank you!
[Edit: Changed based on comments]
Using Bitbucket
Once you have created an account.
You should be able to create a repo with an appropriate url. Then you can clone it to create a local repository.
Check out getting started.
See the following to push the updates to BitBucket.
BitBucket comes with very extensive documentation.
Also there are, other useful tools to work with BitBucket:
BitbucketExtension that allows you to use command line for a number of operations.
Using Mercurial Queues and bitbucket.org
Organizing workflow
You will have to evolve a workflow that suits you. In your case, it looks like you have a testing server and production server.
So , you can setup two repositories, one for the testing server ad one for production. You can make push to testing server automatic so that you can test out the changes immediately. You can tag releases that are then pushed to production server.
Your local repo can be used to publish changes to testing server.
You can push the approved changes, tagged to BitBucket repository.