version-control

问题 I have a developer who has been checking in everything info his TFS branch. Now that i have my hands on his branch i noticed he had no .tfignore file and the bin and package folders and files are all in source control currently. I have implemented a .tfignore file to exclude these files in the future but also want the newly ignored files and folders to be removed from source control. Is there a command or function in TFS that will "reconcile" (remove and ignore) newly ignored files and

问题 I have a git repository that needs to be shared across multiple other projects as a shared library/common code. The projects using this common code are all TFS projects (TFS2013). I am able to host the git repo in TFS, but cannot figure out how to link the git and TFS repos together without duplication. The idea I am trying to achieve is identical to git's submodules, where one git repo can be a submodule to N other git repos: - CommonLib/ (git) - src/ - inc/ - Project1/ (git) - src/ - inc/ -

问题 I usually use git and know little beyond the basics of Subversion, so please be gentle. I'm using TortoiseSVN on Windows 7. The SVN client recently announced it needed to upgrade, so I did that. All files lost their source control icons, and a new menu item appeared in Explorer prompting me to upgrade my repository working copy to v1.7. I did that and see the error attached. I've searched for the file it mentions, it does not exist in my local repository. I seem unable to do a Clean as the

问题 Im building an Ionic 2 application. Version control will be made through SVN. When creating the app using ionic CLI many files are generated. Same happens when adding platforms. Is there any standard approach defining which files to include in Version Controls and which ones to ingnore. (I.E. i think platforms folder should be ignored). 回答1: You can always take a look at the conference app to see how Ionic team recommends to do things. In this case the .gitignore file looks like this: #

问题 The history of my repository looks like: A -- B -- C (branch "foo") \ -- D (branch "bar") The two branches are both "shipping" branches, and are essentially different frontends to a common backend. All the code used to be in one branch, with the foo or bar features turned on or off by a compiler switch, but I branched to make it easier to work with each individually. The problem is that the common "backend" files, by themselves, probably should be a separate branch - and I often want to just

问题 The history of my repository looks like: A -- B -- C (branch "foo") \ -- D (branch "bar") The two branches are both "shipping" branches, and are essentially different frontends to a common backend. All the code used to be in one branch, with the foo or bar features turned on or off by a compiler switch, but I branched to make it easier to work with each individually. The problem is that the common "backend" files, by themselves, probably should be a separate branch - and I often want to just

问题 I'm in the process of refactoring some code which includes moving folders around, and I would like to regularly merge to keep things current. What is the best way to merge after I've moved folders around in my working copy? 回答1: You can move the files around in StarTeam also. Then merge after that. Whatever you do, make sure you don't delete the files and re-add in StarTeam. You'll lose the file history if you do that. 回答2: Moving the files in StarTeam and then updating your project/solution

问题 I have found some Mercurial commands where the revision is specified as a dot; for example: hg revert --all -r . hg update -C -r . hg pull -r . What is the meaning of this dot? To which revision does it correspond? 回答1: hg help revisions says: The reserved name "." indicates the working directory parent. If no working directory is checked out, it is equivalent to null. If an uncommitted merge is in progress, "." is the revision of the first parent. In most cases it will be the revision you

问题 I'm currently working on a project that has several 'Visual Studio Solutions'. One is for the main application and the others are component-based projects which will be reused in other applications. The problem is that all three solutions need to access data from the same database. Each component has its own set of views, functions and sprocs but the schema differs in places (one component may require a field that another component doesn't). Basically, I don't want to have one solution break

问题 I work in an engineering lab, not a computer science lab. As such, our in-house software is not the deliverable product. Instead, the in-house software is used to analyze engineering problems, and we deliver the results. This makes version control a living hell. Or perhaps I should just say that the standard "trunk and branch" version control tree structure doesn't seem to apply. I'm hoping someone can suggest a better way of doing things. For example, each engineering project requires adding