dvcs

问题 At the moment I am investigating how to introduce a DVCS (in particular I am looking at Hg and Git) while retaining the CVS repository in parallel (or even just the access mechanism via the CVS protocol). There are some developers here that are very reluctant to switch from CVS, but running them in parallel should be fine if they can be synchronized automatically or have a CVS protocol frontend. The CVS repository has been manually edited (on-disk) in the past, but all seems to be consistent

问题 Is there a way to configure Mercurial to allow for empty commit messages? If you try hg commit through the CLI without entering a commit message, the commit is canceled with: abort: empty commit message . Now, I know that committing without a message is usually considered bad form, but does Mercurial allow it at all? 回答1: You can use just a space, but I'd really discourage it: hg commit -m " " 回答2: If the problem is that you don't want to enter the -m "blah" part you can always set up an

问题 What were the reason for chosing Mercurial as a basis of FogCreek Kiln, a source control management system with tightly integrated code review, and FogBugz integration? Why Mercurial, and not other (distributed) version control system, like Bazaar, Git or Monotone, or creating own version control system like Fossil (distributed software configuration management, including bug tracking and wiki) did? What were features that make FogCreek choose Mercurial as Kiln engine? 回答1: Here's an answer

问题 In Git I can do this: 1. Start working on new feature: $ git co -b newfeature-123 # (a local feature development branch) do a few commits (M, N, O) master A---B---C \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 2. Pull new changes from upstream master: $ git pull (master updated with ff-commits) master A---B---C---D---E---F \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 3. Rebase off master so that my new feature can be developed against the latest upstream changes: (from newfeature-123) $ git rebase master master A---B---C---D--

问题 In Git I can do this: 1. Start working on new feature: $ git co -b newfeature-123 # (a local feature development branch) do a few commits (M, N, O) master A---B---C \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 2. Pull new changes from upstream master: $ git pull (master updated with ff-commits) master A---B---C---D---E---F \ newfeature-123 M---N---O 3. Rebase off master so that my new feature can be developed against the latest upstream changes: (from newfeature-123) $ git rebase master master A---B---C---D--

问题 For one and a half years, I have been keeping my eyes on the git community in hopes of making the switch away from SVN. One particular issue holding me back is the inability to lock binary files. Throughout the past year I have yet to see developments on this issue. I understand that locking files goes against the fundamental principles of distributed source control, but I don't see how a web development company can take advantage of git to track source code and image file changes when there

问题 For one and a half years, I have been keeping my eyes on the git community in hopes of making the switch away from SVN. One particular issue holding me back is the inability to lock binary files. Throughout the past year I have yet to see developments on this issue. I understand that locking files goes against the fundamental principles of distributed source control, but I don't see how a web development company can take advantage of git to track source code and image file changes when there

问题 Our teem recently faced with merge that removes one leaf of merge and we "lost" changes (as if you perform hg merge --tool internal:local ). This happen because we don't experienced with hg merge command. hg diff shown only one difference, but not other. BASE --- HEAD1 --- MERGE \---- HEAD2 --/ Suppose in HEAD1 I merge HEAD2 but has not yet commit changes. HEAD2 diff against MERGE I see by hg diff . It is -r BASE:HEAD2 patch. How can I see diff between current local merge state with HEAD1 as

问题 I'm trying to learn git. I read few tutorials. Everywhere I got confused with the actual meaning of this term called 'Repository' . See the below definitions : A repository contains a directory named .git, where git keeps all of its metadata for the repository. The content of the .git directory are private to git. So, my question is whether the directory which contains entire project (i.e. all the files of my project) along with the .git directory (usually it's hidden by default) is called

问题 I have a "central" Mercurial repository, which configured to use HTTPS and requires authentication to clone-pull-push changes. Developers has their own repositories on their computers. They configure their local settings freely, and for example add section like [ui] username = anyname to their local mercurial.ini file. When a user try to push his changes to the "central" repository, he authenticates, but authentication info is not stored in Mercurial. Mercurial store locally configured