How to use a CVS repository locally? - version-control

Is it possible to use (Win)CVS as a local repository? I don't need a multi-user configuration with sharing a repository on a server (I've been using WinCVS for years in a team, and it worked fine for us), but just want to keep track of different versions of my project code locally. Anywhere some good documentation or tutorials? Or are there other options?

Yes, you can create a local CVS repository in any empty directory
on your computer by setting the CVSROOT environment variable
to that directory and running the cvs init command.
The CVS manual describes all the CVS concepts and commands.

I'd suggest not using CVS, which is extremely old, and lacks important features, and instead use a more modern DVCS such as Mercurial or git. That way you don't need to setup any server, and you get atomic commits and better branch handling/merging (among lots of other benefits).

Related

How to set up GIT as version control tool for a small team

We are using Eclipse with a SVN client plug-in. This client needs a server running; what about Git? We need to work in a LAN environment without internet access. I have read some basic tutorials about using Git with Eclipse. If I got a Java project in my Git repository, how can I share it with my teammate?
Even though you can share your local repositories, I would suggest setting up a server. There many free alternatives like:
gitlab (http://gitlab.org)
gitorious (http://gitorious.org)
gitolite (https://github.com/sitaramc/gitolite)
gitblit (http://gitblit.com/)
But IMO the best one is Atlassian Stash which for small team will cost you only $10.
if you need to share it, you need some way to access it from each other. Bitbucket is great for small teams who need private code.
If you are always using it from inside a LAN one of you should set up a shared section which you can all push your git changes too (a shared folder or shared drive is good enough) but i would recommend using github / bitbucket if possible
from a command line (can probably use it within eclipse too)
git clone file:////192.168.1.100/code
and then you can psuh and pull from 192.168.1.100/code assuming you have write permissions there
if you're coming from subversion to git, you will be faced with the concept of local repository vs shared repository. You will be able to have a local repository on your computer where you can do as many commits as you want and then only push relevant changes to the shared repository (the one that your teammates will be able to see).
Here's an useful link on the possibilities to share a repository: http://www.jedi.be/blog/2009/05/06/8-ways-to-share-your-git-repository/ (ignore the last one, GITHUB, which will require internet access).
In your particular situation I would recommend sharing via SSH or via GIT daemon.
I also really recommend you to take a look on Eric Sink's book here. He's even offering hardcopies for free!
as suggested you can run your own instance of gitolite or gitlab, but for a rudimentary solution i suggest you just check the following answer:
https://serverfault.com/a/113688/181010
basically you can use any folder as a shared repository as long as all users can access the files either locally or via ssh. that link discribes how to tell git to create its file with rights that are appropriate for usage by all users of one unix group (instead of only the single user owning the files).

Local Source control repository - cross platform

I am looking for a 'local' source control software, I don't need it to be necessarily available on network.. Its meant to be only for personal use..
What I am looking for is something like:
Need it to be cross platform. The biggest problem is, I need the same local repository to be available on both windows and Linux! (Is this even possible? :s ) I dual boot Windows 7 and Ubuntu and have managed to setup workspace that works in both OS without changes, now I need a source control software!
Easy installation, I have never installed one before! :)
And Has eclipse plugin..
I have used VSS for this purpose before, but that is only on Windows!
I looked for Mercurial, but I am not sure if I can use the same repository on both the OS!
Any suggestions are appreciated!
UPDATE: Thanks for your replies.. Yes I do want the same repository to be accessed from different operating systems.. Everyone has suggested an on-line repository but I 'need it to be local'.. Internet is not something I can depend on (I now know git takes care of this..! :)), I would not want version of, say my personal recordings of some home functions tweaked in audacity, to be hosted on-line! Right now, I am trying out git, as a local repository solution..
If you definitely want a repository that's always available on a local filesystem, I'd probably go for Mercurial or Git. Most likely Mercurial, as it has the best windows support (including the TortoiseHg gui), but Git works similarly.
But there's two other issues:
Do you make frequent backups?
What file system type will you use for the shared repository?
In this particular case, I would not trust a single shared filesystem as the best basket to put your eggs in; In each boot environment, I would maintain working repositories separate from the shared one. This would give you some redundancy.
Here's how this would work:
Two repositories U and W, for Ubuntu and Windows respectively, and one shared repository S, accessable frome either boot environment.
Assuming a stable situation, with all three repositories in sync:
Commit any new code to repository U in Ubuntu.
$ hg commit -m 'changes from linux'
Push the changes to S.
$ hg push
Reboot into windows.
...
Pull the latest changesets from S into W
W> hg fetch
Update your code, commit frequently
Push prior to rebooting into linux
W> hg push
Reboot
And repeat step 4, but now from linux
$ hg fetch # performs an hg pull, followed by an update.
Rinse, lather, repeat.
That's said, with both Mercurial and Git, you can synchronise your repositories across the net any time, so I would surely recommend you try that out some time.
And note: the best backup is having a copy of your data on a live file system on another computer, preferably at another location.
I'm pretty sure you can Mercurial, since the whole repository is in .hg folder.
Try TortoiseHG - it's easy to install and use.
Why do you want it to be local? The benefit of source control, is that you can have multiple clients working on the same source, without worrying too much about conflicts etc.
Even though it doesn't really answer your question, this advices might solve your problem:
Just create a project for yourself at https://github.com/ or http://sourceforge.net/ any other free online repository hosting provider. SVN, CVS, GIT all come with excellent IDE integration and clients run on almost all operating systems.
Hope this helps. Regards.
Do you really want to have a duplicate repository on different operating systems? That doesn't make sense to me. What would be the purpose of doing that?
I think you instead want to have a single repository that you can access from any operating system.
In this case, you can just install Subversion (or whatever source control system you prefer) on a server and access it from the operating systems you use. There are plenty of client tools for Mac/Windows/Linux that can talk to subversion repositories, RapidSVN being free and cross-platform for one.
If you don't have your own server, there are plenty of places online that will host Subversion for you.

Recommendations for handling source code inhouse

Hi
I'm currently seeing a need for handling source code for a few projects I'm working on. I have no need for external hosting, but I do need to have a structure internal in my development environment.
So, how would you guys recommend to handle this? To you just place the files on a file share in your environment, or do you set up some kind of versioning systems? I'm quite new to this, but I would like to have some way of getting back to old versions of my code, I would like to have the source code centrally stored so I can reach if from bothmy laptop and workstation.
/Andy.l
Use a source control management system - I would suggest using a distributed one such as Git or Mercurial, so you don't need a server or need to be online to work.
You can still have a central location where you push and pull stuff from if you really want to.
If you must have a server, go with SVN - it is easy to setup and widely used.
With all of these options, there are hosted services that you can use as a central store.
If you are using windows OS, then Visual SVN is quite good. You can install it on the server and use a client like Tortoise SVN to connect to it from other machines. The basic version is free to use.
Definitely use a version control system, it will allow you to do some nice workflows on your coding day and have all securely stored. There are several good free vcs (git, mercurial, subversion, etc). For Some time I used a combination of git + dropbox or sugar sync to back up and share my repos
http://git-scm.com/
Do setup a source control repository. Using a SCM, has nothing but benefits.
With respect of what SCM system to chose, to very simple repositories to setup and learn are Mercurial (distributed), and Subversion (centralized). I know you said you wanted centralized access to your sources, but keep in mind that that doesn't meant you can't use Mercurial for that purpose.
Here's a great tutorial on Mercurial by Joel Spolsky.
Lots of choices based on environment, etc.
SVN is an excellent all-around choice for centralized source control. You can also use Mercurial and Git internally if you prefer DVCS (even in a local environment).
In any case, regardless of what version control system you have - get one. Even if it's just one developer doing personal projects, source control is a must.
There's no question that setting up a SCM makes sense and has only advantages. Which SCM to use depends on several circumstances:
Do your co-workers already know any SCM? We're using SVN and I think it would be quite hard to teach my colleagues the concepts of a DVCS like git
In my opinion, using a DVCS like git needs more discipline during work: you have to remember to push to the central repository.
But this is also an advantage: you can create your own development branches and work on them without publishing them to the rest of your colleagues (saves reputation in some cases :-))
If you or your co-workers often work from remote, using a DVCS is more comfortable than using a centralized one like SVN: you need no connection to your central repository but can still checkin, create branches and (quite important) view the complete history of your project without connecting (e.g. via VPN) to your servers at work.
For a centralized VCS, I can recommend SVN (setup as Hps supposed)
As DVCS I can recommend Git (msysgit with tortoisegit)
If you decide to use SVN, you can still use git-svn on the clients: the repository is being run with SVN, but anyhow, you get the advantages of a DVCS while being offline.

Introduction to Mercurial

I have just begun working on a project which uses Mercurial as a version control system, and I need some basic tips on how to use this. Please use this question to give some introductory tips on this technology.
The official Mercurial site
Especially, I am looking for tips on the best programs to use and the best techniques to use (branches, in and out-checking etc. I need to learn the best-practices!)
I know you already have the Mercurial site but the resource most useful to me was the Mercurial book. It's an excellent overview of the program and how to use it.
I found the best way to learn Mercurial was just to use it on a project. I imported into Mercurial a project I had exported from subversion and did some regular development with it. I made sure to clone the repository for different changesets so that I could get used to the merging and updating. I haven't learned all of the advanced uses but I'm now on a pretty firm footing with it and haven't switched back to Subversion yet.
A lot of projects have different techniques for commit workflow. Some have changes pushed from the developers, like centralized systems, and some will pull the changes from contributors (Linux, for example). It's hard to generalize too much without knowing the process for your project.
This is how I do my development:
Centralized tree on a file share or http, called project-trunk or project that is the definitive project version
A clean tree on my system that I clone from the remote repository and use to push back to the repository. I then clone from this tree for my changes. I call this tree project-local
Clone the project-local tree for each of my changes: eg. project-addusers, project-141, etc.
After I am finished with the commits to a tree, I then push the changes to the project-local repository
Finally, push the changes in the project-local to project-trunk
I have the clean project-local tree because then I can push all the changesets back to the trunk at one time, which is helpful if there is a group of related changes that need to push back together.
As for tools, it depends on your platform. I just use the vanilla command line tool. Coming from TortoiseSVN, it was a bit of a change to go to the command line. But I'm fine with it now. I tried using TortoiseHg but it didn't function well on my Windows 7 x64 virtual machine. I hear it's much better on the supported 32-bit platforms.
Here is a helpful tutorial on Mercurial written by Joel Spolsky.
It covers basic usage and commands, as well as how to work with Mercurial at a more conceptual level. If you are already familiar with SVN, then the first part is definitely worth reading: it talks about the major conceptual differences between SVN and Mercurial, because trying to use Mercurial in the same way that you use SVN is asking for trouble.
Have a look at the Mercurial book, or at this Mercurial tutorial.
Depending on your background with other source control tools, I would also suggest a specific SCM-whatever to Mercurial guide. For example, have a look at this guide for Subversion users.
Another good resource for getting your head around the whole "distributed" source control idea is: http://betterexplained.com/articles/intro-to-distributed-version-control-illustrated/ ... with helpful diagrams!
If you use the latest TortoiseHG client and include the install directory in your PATH environment, you will be able to use both the nice GUI they provide, and the command line 'hg'
I cannot recommend using the mq extensions too much. They make for a great 'working repository' environment.
I use the queues to manage local changes against a subversion repository. I do my local short term changes and use mercurial to keep in sync with subversion and the rest of the team.
A few of Steve Losh's blog posts are good, even though they're a couple of year old now. They mainly deal with how to work with branching.
Guide to Branching in Mercurial
Branch Workflows - Branching as needed
Branch Workflows - Stable and Default
It's also worth looking at his hgtip.com site.
In addition to the Mercurial Book and the Hg Init tutorial, I'll like to mention the example-driven guide I've written:
Mercurial Kick Start
It shows how to get started with Mercurial and also covers some more advanced concepts such as named branches and hgsubversion. I've used it when teaching Mercurial to new users and they seemed to like it.

Any way to do a local CVS proxy/server?

I have an online CVS repository that I need to check code into. However, the server is outside my control and is often down.
So, is there a way to set up some sort of local CVS server/proxy such that I can check my code into the local CVS server regularly and have the local CVS server batch commit the changes to the online CVS repo periodically?
The local repository could possibly run some other SCM system, if that was necessary to prevent conflict with CVS. Online commits could possibly be done manually, or via cron. I'm open to suggestions.
I guess that my main concern would be the problems faced in trying to set up some sort of repository 'hierarchy'.
PS: I'm running Linux all along the 'hierarchy'.
Edit: Found a similar item here.
Use git locally, and then git-cvsexportcommit would be my suggestion. There's a blog post that talks about this at http://issaris.blogspot.com/2005/11/cvs-to-git-and-back.html although I'll be the first to admit that the export process isn't as easy to use as perhaps it could be.
I'd recommend running git locally while continuing to use your CVS server when you have a connection to it. Here's a nicely-written article that explains how:
http://www.kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/v1.4.4.4/cvs-migration.html
You can use git as a "frontend" to CVS which will allow to you check-in your changes locally (offline) and then sync them up to the CVS server when your connection is available. There is a bit of a task to setup the environment, but once you get it going the workflow is pretty nice.
See How to export revision history from mercurial or git to cvs? for the setup & workflow.
This doesn't really answer the question, but it sounds like you need a distributed VCS system.
I think you should consider using a distributed source management system such as git or mercurial which support this kind of decentralized source control.
I have never used it, but CVSup may do what you need. As others have mentioned, though, a distributed VCS system like git or mercurial would probably be better.