I have NEVER used ANY version control system before. I am currently using the check-in-check-out feature of Dreamweaver but I would like to implement some sort of version control system where I can roll back to previous versions. Also it would be great but not required if I could go back like 3 versions, fix a bug, and have that bug fixed for all the later versions. I have no experience with version control, mainly because I never knew about it until I started reading the pragmatic programmer. So I would probably need step by step directions so if there is a tutorial or something I can be pointed to that would be great too.
Thanks!
Turtoise SVN would be a great first step into proper version control system.
Bazaar have impressed me lately, it's a fairly new scm and not that many 3rd party tools just yet. But if you want the latest and the greatest try it out!
Step by step guide(!) ;
Download
Bazaar in five
minutes
If you're on Windows, and want a smooth but powerful Distributed Version Control System, I recommend Mercurial through TortoiseHg. As a newcomer to version control, I can attest to its robust and nice, detailed interface, where you can smoothly progress from GUI-clicking to command line operations when needed.
Related
I'm looking for a subversion tool, and i have the following requirements:
Must integrate into VS 2008
Automatically submits new versions
Does not use the command line as primary interface
Doesn't clutter up explorer with bright icon overlays or context menus
is only going to be used by one user mostly if not completely, so doesn't need to have advanced diff tools or anything like that
Basically, i want a subversioning tool that will only bother me when creating a project or actually needing to get something from a previous version.
Does something like that exist, and if so, what is it?
Yes. VisualSVN (commercial)
Except for "automatically submits new versions" - that makes no sense.
The day computers know when your code is ready to be committed and free of bugs is the day the world needs a lot less programmers
You commit when you're done a task, which effectively gives you a rollback point. It's also important to add a meaningful commit message ("Fixed crash when clicking on Save button") - this way you can find things easily later. A lot of new users to version control skip this part, and unfortunately only learn the hard way 3 months later when they need to go back and undo a fix/feature.
AnkhSvn is a free alternative, I've personally only used 1.x, which was really quite terrible. It definitely looks more usable in 2.x.
One upside to VisualSVN is that it uses TortoiseSVN for a lot of its dialogs. This means when you're working with subversion just from explorer, you have basically the same interface and same UI. Quite handy, as it lets you do things like edit images or text files without having to fire up VisualStudio, or edit scripts/installers, or other parts of a product that are not necessarily in VisualStudio.
Yes, they are available.
The two I know of are VisualSVN and AnkhSVN. There are a bunch of comparisons available on SO
I use AnkhSVN myself. It is free, integrates nicely with Visual Studio, and doesn't cause any performance issues.
visual SVN is what you need.
What is the best version control system to implement with PowerBuilder 11.5?
If you have examples of how you have did branching/trunk/tags that would be awesome. We have tried to wrap our heads around it a few times and always run into problems because we use shared libraries such as PFC/PFE in multiple applications.
Right now we are only using PBNative, and it sucks.
The Agent SVN is a MS-SCCI Subversion plug-in works with PowerBuilder.
Here is a link that describes how to setup Agent SVN to work with PowerBuilder and Subversion.
We currently use Perforce and it's P4SCC plugin, which works very well. In fact, I'm sure I read somewhere that the guys at Sybase who write PowerBuilder, actually use Perforce themselves.
So, to be fair, let's start out by saying that while you're asking about version control, PBNative is source control. If you compare something that is intended to have more features than just keep two developers from editing the same piece of source, then yes, PBNative will suck. The Madone SL may be an incredible bicycle, but if you're trying to take a couple of laps around an Indy track, it will suck.
"Best" is a pretty subjective word. There are lots of features available in version control and configuration management tools. You can get tons of features, but you'll pay through the nose. StarTeam has some nice features like being able to trace a client change request or bug report all the way through to the changed code, and being able to link in a customized diff tool (which is particularly useful in PB). Then again, if cost is your key criteria rather than features, there are lots of free options that will get the job done. As long as the tool supports the Microsoft SCC interface, you should be OK.
There is a relatively active NNTP newsgroup that focuses on source control with PowerBuilder, which you can also access via the web. You can probably find some already-posted opinions there.
Many years ago I used Starteam to control PB applications. PowerBuilder needless to say is an outdated bear, and it has to export each and every object from its "libraries" into source control.
Currently our legacy PB apps have its libraries saved whole into Subversion, without any support for diff's etc.
We use Visual SourceSafe. We don't use PFC, but we do have libraries that are shared among several projects. Till now, each project was developed separately from the others, and so the shared libraries were duplicated. To have them synchronized, they were all shared at the VSS level. Lately we've reorganized our sources so all projects are near each other, and there's only one instance of the shared libraries.
VSS is definitively not the best source control system, to say the least, but it integrates into PB without the need of any bridges. PB has an inherent problem working with source control, so it probably won't make a very difference working with one instead of the other (at least from the PB point of view).
Now, on a personal note, I'd like to say PB 11.5 is a piece of sh*t. It constantly crashes, full of unbelievable UI nuisance and just brings productivity to its knees. It's probably the worst IDE ever created. Stay away if possible.
FYI: The new PB12 (PB.NET) will integrate with SCC systems so you can easily choose which source control system that you want to use. Since we basically have dropped PBLs (they are now directories) files can be checked in/out individually - even with a plain vanilla editor since files are now normal (unicode) text files.
StarTeam integrates so beautifully with the PB IDE. I used that combination at my previous company (PB9 and ST5.x) for several years. You should be managing your code at the object level - don't log the entire PBL into ST...
If you're having problems with that setup, hit me up offline. phoran at sybase dot com.
We use Merant Version Manager for older projects and TFS for newer work. The only issue we have is that TFS does not support keyword expansion and changing the 'read the flowerbox comments' attitude people have. Some folks are nervous about losing the inline versioning history.
We use StarTeam and have been very pleased with it. It combines bug tracking with version control. Unfortunately though we don't store our files on the object level. We just store the PBL files directly in source control. Anything that supports the SCC interface theoretically should work correctly in PowerBuilder.
PB9: We used PVCS but had stability problems with pbl corruption and also problems co-existing with later versions of Crystal Reports (dll conflict) so now we use PB9 with Dynamsoft's Source Anywhere Standalone. This system is more primitive; it is missing the more advanced features for promotion levels and for pulling out an older milestone version of all objects to make a patch build.
What we are looking for now is something which will allow more advanced "change management", to support promotion levels at the change level (rather than at the object level). Would it be better to use perforce, starteam, or (harvest change manager + HarPB), or something else? Any advice on these combinations would be greatly appreciated.
You can always use Plastic SCM with PowerBuilder through SCC. Plastic is pretty advanced in terms of graphics, tools, replica and so on, so it's always a good choice to keep in mind.
I use Visual SourceSafe with Visual Studio. Every time I work on a project for a while, the directory structure on my harddisk gets messed up.
The latest versions of the files are going to their own nested folder, so I end up with C:\VS2005\Projects\MyProject\MyProject\MyProject\MyProject
What is causing this?
I can't help with your particular problem, but I remember my own pains using SourceSafe just a few years ago.
If you have a choice on the source control system you use, I'd recommend taking a look at other options. There are several good ones to choose from.
I switched to SVN and never looked back. It is light-years better than SourceSafe and setup only takes a few minutes if you use visualsvn server (a free product). As for Visual Studio integration, visualsvn client is about $50, or just use ANKH + Tortoise (both are open source and very good). Bottom line is that the switch doesn't have to cost any money, and the installer packages are quick to get the system running on both the clients and the server.
Hope that helps, and good luck with SourceSafe if you have to keep using it.
Update: See also, this thread
You're going to need to get an old priest and a young priest... or a better version control system.
What is causing this?
Just the general contra-expectation insanity which is VSS and VS combined I'm afraid. You could spend the time to really get to know VSS and how it thinks of things and how to avoid the quirks and pitfalls, but the thing is such an outdated beast I'd second Robert's asssertion that it's more profitable to get yourself a copy of SVN and VisualSVN and never worry about this again.
I can not help but be in agreement with the other gentlemen, run away from VSS as fast as you can. If you have not been bitten by it already, you will. Any tool will be better, be it Subversion, Mercurial or others. The fist two have extensions named Tortoise{SVN,HG} that will enable you to play with a user-friendly interface if you don't like CLI tools. My own choice is HG (also known as Mercurial) as it is a decentralized/distributed VCS which enable offline work/commits and easier distributed work.
I'm trying to implement a version control system, but as most of us know designers don't feel comfortable with version control systems. I'm looking for a solution mostly for our designers using Photoshop, Flash and other design tools.
It's not a big deal to use a version control system, like VSS 2005, with our frontend and backend coders, but we have some serious problems with our designers. They mostly refuse to use version control systems, and they are right at some points, mostly on productivity level. They mostly work on more than one file, and on more than one application like Photoshop and Flash.
I don't know if version controlling is the right answer or not. Maybe we have to implement a backup system, but there has to be a versioning system, I think. I and our designers are very tired of doing the same thing or going back to the previous designs over and over again.
It would be wonderful to know how digital agencies overcome this problem. If version controlling is the answer, please share your tips on how to make designers comfortable with version controlling.
EDIT 1: Maybe it would be great to have a solution like Dropbox, as it doesn't disturb you with check-ins/check-outs. All you have to do is to open up a file, work on it and save it, the rest is handled by Dropbox.
EDIT 2: We are on Windows, so no chance to implement anything other than Windows support :(
Thanks...
I haven't actually ever done this with graphic designers, but is it possible that Subversion's WebDAV support might work for them? You can mount a WebDAV share as a drive under Mac OS X and Windows XP & Vista, I believe. Each save becomes a new revision in the repository.
And as for your second, hidden question: Yes, you do need to implement a backup system. At least if you value your data.
Adobe has it's own version control, Version Cue, which is bundled with the Creative Suite package. http://www.adobe.com/products/creativesuite/versioncue/sdk_overview/ Apparently, Eclipse can plug into this. I haven't tried it extensively, but I know it integrates nicely into the file dialog in Creative Suite.
NOTE: Version Cue has been discontinued by adobe after the release of CS5:
http://www.adobe.com/products/adobedrive/
Adobe Version Cue maybe?
You might want to try subversion because there are plugins for windows explorer and max OS X finder. integration with the filesystem has been a big help for me on projects where non-developers had to work with source control. This includes projects that have had designers.
Another key thing that helped was having a good directory structure for the files the designers and other non-developers worked with.
I just came accross ConceptShare and it's pretty great...it's not automated version control but you could use it for that and it's a great way to collect and document feedback.
You can try Subversion (installed on a local or remote server) plus Adobe Creative Suite plug-in that would face the designers - Pixelnovel Timeline
It's compact, has previews of all versions (submitted via the plug-in), works for Photoshop, Illustrator & InDesign.
If developers also use Subversion, everything (code & design) can be kept in one place.
Instead of trying to integrate a version control system with lots of applications on different operating systems, you might want to have a look at copy-on-write file systems such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ext3cow. That way your designers won't even notice a difference; all they will have to do is save their work to a network share on a linux/samba server using ext3cow.
I'm both a designer and coder. I usually version control code (text data) with git, and simply use "save as" with a version name for graphics (binary data). And I run Apple's Time Machine on top of all that, for safety.
To me, version control on graphic files would just be a burden. I'd have to roll back to see changes, and you wouldn't even get one of the great features of version control: see the changes you did in a specific commit just by looking at diffs. The log feature is nice though, to see how you progressed in time, and notes, but to me personally it's not worth it.
Take a look at Perforce - it has a plugin and tools that allow you to use it from within designer tools such as Photoshop, its also super fast and integrates well with Visual Studio - runs on Windows as well as Linux
What I did once was create a "Snapshot" shortcut on the desktop that added and committed everything from a specific directory.
If every designer commits to their own branch (trivial with a DVCS but easy with SVN too) there will be no conflicts, and the cross-branch merging can be done at intervals by someone who isn't afraid of it.
I've been having my eyes on GridIron's Flow for a while now. It looks like a competent version control suite that has some neat asset management features such as visualization on graphics between versions and relationships between different assets. Flow has support for handling files for adobe photoshop, illustrator, flash etc. However as of now (early january) GridIron hasn't released Flow yet other than having to announce the beta program.
Most digital agencies that I know of that mainly do web development use Subversion for version control. To avoid conflicts on image files an artist will lock the files he or she will work on. That way, another artist won't do the mistake of overwriting changes. This requires some coordination among artists and devs so that noone steps on anyone shoes. Also, if someone forgets to unlock, there is the possibility to break locks.
If you're into distributed version control you might want to take a look at Mercurial as it has good support for Windows and has some neat cheat sheets. The Ruby kids are using git but is rather lacking in Windows.
Before using version control with artists, at least make sure they know the basics of version control and let them fool around with it in a sandbox. Also make sure they've set up some basic rules of conduct when collaborating with each other and interacting through version control (i.e. ways to make sure they don't destroy each others works or step on each others toes).
So I want to get a project on a distributed version control system, such as mercurial, git, or bazaar. The catch is that I need the Windows support to be good, i.e. no instructions that start off with "install cygwin...". Now I've heard that git's Windows support is decent these days, but don't have any first hand experience. Also, it sounds like the bazaar team has an explicit goal of making it as multiplatform as possible.
Can I get any recommendations?
I use msys-git on windows every single day. Works fast and flawlessly.
Although the newer build has some problems with git-svn, this build (Git-1.5.5-preview20080413.exe) has a working git-svn.
There's a nice comparison between git, hg and bzr in this InfoQ article. They all have their strengths and weaknesses. You'll have to think about your project and your workflows and choose the best fit. The good news is that they're all fairly good.
At last I checked, the only thing you need for Mercurial is Python and to grab a binary package. If you find yourself with more time and want to fiddle / build it yourself, look here.
The only real drawback with HG is its idea of branching .. but for some people that's a major plus.
I like it because its intuitive, easy to install and works on anything that Python does. I don't think that all of the available plugins will work for you, but most should.
I've had the best luck with Bazaar, followed by Mercurial. Never could get Git to work correctly. A quick search shows that Git still requires clunky emulation layers like Cygwin/MSYS, and I can't find any integration tools like TortoiseBzr for Git.
With Mercurial in Windows, I had several minor issues (insensitive paths, symlinks, ). They were usually fixed eventually, but I felt that the same quality of testing was not applied to running on Windows as for the other platforms. Bazaar also had better documentation for integrating with native applications like Visual C.
EDIT: Perhaps add a "dvcs", "distrubutedversioncontrol", "distrubuted"
I've used Mercurial on Windows with no problems. You can use TortoiseHG or just use the command line. Mercurial does require Python, but that is easy to install in Windows as well.
Mercurial Binary Packages
I agree with basszero. I'm using mercurial under windows and it's as easy and reliable as it can get. My development team is spread over Europe (well Dublin and Vienna :-).
We use VPN to commit or sometime the built in webserver (hgserve). Both work fine with no problems out of the box.
Also diff3 open source tool works perfect with mercurial and TortoiseHG out of the box.
If you are concerned about an easy to use interface:
The bazaar folk now include TortoiseBzr in their windows binary package. That's got to be a pretty strong indicator that they think it is up to snuff. I don't know what the maturity/stability of TortoiseHg is, but there certainly isn't a decent GUI interface for git yet, and the MSYS git build still needs some work IMO.
If your team are comfortable with or prefer the command line, then either bazaar or mercurial would probably work well for you, and are both probably about the same in terms of learning curve. Git's learning curve is much higher. It is like the swiss-army knife that is almost wider than it is long, with all the little gadgets and do-dads in it and hanging off it, with the springs so tight that you occasionally slice a finger open trying to prise a blade out.
In my experience using GIT on windows is a major pain. But I have been using Fossil SCM for some time now, and I think it actually fits your needs exactly.
It also has a built in Ticket system and a Wiki. And the whole program is contained in 1 file and it works right out of the box.
I totally recommend it.
Here is a link to the site http://www.fossil-scm.org/
Remember, this site is self hosting, what that means is you are looking at the web interface to fossil it self, when you look at tickets and the wiki and documentation, you actually are using fossil.
But if your project has millions of lines of code and is a few gigabytes in size, you have to use GIT, there is no way around that problem.
Enjoy.