php-windows Digest 6 Feb 2009 20:37:26 -0000 Issue 3565
Topics (messages 29149 through 29153):
Re: [PHP] Question about version control.. sorta..
29149 by: TG
29150 by: German Geek
29151 by: Phpster
Re: VC6 vs VC9
29152 by: Mario Brandt
29153 by: Evan Burkitt
Administrivia:
To subscribe to the digest, e-mail:
php-windows-digest-subscr...@lists.php.net
To unsubscribe from the digest, e-mail:
php-windows-digest-unsubscr...@lists.php.net
To post to the list, e-mail:
php-wind...@lists.php.net
----------------------------------------------------------------------
--- Begin Message ---
So, for my purposes.. after trying a handful of solutions.. open source and
commercial.. I think I've decided that Reliable Software's "Code Co-op"
is what's going to work best for me.
My trial is almost up, so as soon as my next paycheck comes, I think I'll
be purchasing the full version for $150.
For me, it's totally worth it. It stores everything in a local database,
but allows collaboration if that's what you're into. Via email for the
$150 version, via LAN for the $200 version.
It lets me add files by type, is easy to check out files. Anyway.. if
anyone's looking for an easy Windows version control system, check it out.
(no, I don't work for them, just passing along the recommendation since I'm
digging this software)
Thanks for all the input!
-TG
----- Original Message -----
From: "TG" <tg-...@gryffyndevelopment.com>
To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:40:23 -0500
Subject: [PHP] Question about version control.. sorta..
> Ok.. so I know about CVS and SVN and unfortunately haven't had as much
> experience with them as I'd like. I've used them, but always in a really
> basic sense and always on systems that have already been set up. A
friend
> recently mentioned GIT ( http://git.or.cz/ ) too.
>
> But here's my situation.. I deal with dozens of clients. I usually make
a
> backup copy of their site (at least the files, not usually the DB) so I
> have the latest copy of the site to make changes to. Usually I'm the
only
> one working on the site, but sometimes other people may make changes too.
> Not so often than we're conflicting with our changes, or if this is a
known
> issue, we make sure to coordinate.
>
> What I'd ideally like to do is be able to use a CVS type system to keep
> incremental backups of the code. So instead of checking code out of CVS,
> changing it, then checking it back in... I'd like to just do a mass
checkin
> of the whole site and have changes recorded and the ability to look at
> previous versions with DIFF and all that. And of course the ability to
> 'check out' a previous set of files by date or revision maybe.
>
>
> I assume you can do this with one of the major version control systems,
but
> mostly what I see with how to use these systems involves checking code
out
> then checking it back in. That's not really what I want to do.
>
> The other issue is that I run Windows. So if there's something nice and
> WinGUI, that'd be nice. Please no "you should be running linux"
> responses. I don't have anything against Linux or Mac, they're great
> systems. But I have my reasons for running Windows.
>
> Also, I realize this is semi-OT for a PHP list, but asking on a CVS list
or a
> SVN list might not give me the more comprehensive/broad experience base
I'm
> looking for. I'd like a semi-unbiased response. :)
>
> Thanks in advance!
>
> -TG
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
I use GIT and Subversion. Subversion is still a bit hard to use (branching
etc) and not distributed but that was before i knew about GIT :-P. You have
a central repository that you need to commit to and it's still quite CVS
like (which is really confusing and horrible).
GIT is nice and fast and also works in a distributed environment. So, it's
great when you are the only one working on it or even if you have developers
that don't always have broadband and want to commit to the central
repository (when they are connected). It also has a windows port that is
reasonably easy to install. Check out the cygwin unix on windows port
library. It's great when you want the best of both worlds. Git is a package
that you can select in there. I use windows at work and cygwin for all the
unix stuff i want to do in windows, like perl, bash etc. It's awesome!
Spending $150 on this is not really worth it i think and using a database
for version control seems a bit odd. They have a database internally anyway
which is optimised for the purpose and stored as files. Databases store the
data as files (on disk) as well and only have the benefit that some of the
data is stored partially in memory (indeces etc) and speeds up data
retrieval (and i believe writing it too)...
So give GIT a go. It also has a windows shell extension called 'Git
Extensions'.
Although you might like the GUI stuff, i think it's a lot easier to fire up
a console (cmd or bash) and write
git init
git add .
git commit -a -m "your msg"
>From then on, you just have to type:
git commit -a -m "your msg"
to make commits. There is lots of help for it on the web which you wont get
with a proprietary solution. In general Open Source seems to have better
support than closed source (simply because there are a lot more people who
are willing to help because they want to and not because they get paid).
You can create a central repository relatively easy too and push/pull your
commits to your local repository (
http://toolmantim.com/articles/setting_up_a_new_remote_git_repository ). You
can also use one of the many repositories out there if you don't want to
take care of backups etc.
BTW, what do you need incremental backups for in a versioning system? A
versioning system is an incremental backup (an advanced one)! You might want
to backup the whole repository to a different location but you can safely
overwrite that.
I think Linus Torwalds did a really good job on that :-). Hail Linus (lol).
It's versioning as easy as it can get.
Hope this helps someone.
Regards,
Tim
Tim-Hinnerk Heuer
http://www.ihostnz.com
On Fri, Feb 6, 2009 at 3:06 PM, TG <tg-...@gryffyndevelopment.com> wrote:
> So, for my purposes.. after trying a handful of solutions.. open source and
> commercial.. I think I've decided that Reliable Software's "Code Co-op"
> is what's going to work best for me.
>
> My trial is almost up, so as soon as my next paycheck comes, I think I'll
> be purchasing the full version for $150.
>
> For me, it's totally worth it. It stores everything in a local database,
> but allows collaboration if that's what you're into. Via email for the
> $150 version, via LAN for the $200 version.
>
> It lets me add files by type, is easy to check out files. Anyway.. if
> anyone's looking for an easy Windows version control system, check it out.
>
> (no, I don't work for them, just passing along the recommendation since I'm
> digging this software)
>
> Thanks for all the input!
>
> -TG
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "TG" <tg-...@gryffyndevelopment.com>
> To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
> Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:40:23 -0500
> Subject: [PHP] Question about version control.. sorta..
>
> > Ok.. so I know about CVS and SVN and unfortunately haven't had as much
> > experience with them as I'd like. I've used them, but always in a really
> > basic sense and always on systems that have already been set up. A
> friend
> > recently mentioned GIT ( http://git.or.cz/ ) too.
> >
> > But here's my situation.. I deal with dozens of clients. I usually make
> a
> > backup copy of their site (at least the files, not usually the DB) so I
> > have the latest copy of the site to make changes to. Usually I'm the
> only
> > one working on the site, but sometimes other people may make changes too.
>
> > Not so often than we're conflicting with our changes, or if this is a
> known
> > issue, we make sure to coordinate.
> >
> > What I'd ideally like to do is be able to use a CVS type system to keep
> > incremental backups of the code. So instead of checking code out of CVS,
> > changing it, then checking it back in... I'd like to just do a mass
> checkin
> > of the whole site and have changes recorded and the ability to look at
> > previous versions with DIFF and all that. And of course the ability to
> > 'check out' a previous set of files by date or revision maybe.
> >
> >
> > I assume you can do this with one of the major version control systems,
> but
> > mostly what I see with how to use these systems involves checking code
> out
> > then checking it back in. That's not really what I want to do.
> >
> > The other issue is that I run Windows. So if there's something nice and
> > WinGUI, that'd be nice. Please no "you should be running linux"
> > responses. I don't have anything against Linux or Mac, they're great
> > systems. But I have my reasons for running Windows.
> >
> > Also, I realize this is semi-OT for a PHP list, but asking on a CVS list
> or a
> > SVN list might not give me the more comprehensive/broad experience base
> I'm
> > looking for. I'd like a semi-unbiased response. :)
> >
> > Thanks in advance!
> >
> > -TG
>
>
> --
> PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
> To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
>
>
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
My two cents,
It's not bad, but you need to be aware of collisions. We set it up
with a folder for each developer and it contains the main application
code.
The upside is that we each have our own code base so we don't affect
each other when cutting new code. The downside is that we can each
have the same file checked out and be working on it. The trouble comes
when one deb checks in the file, as occasionally it will duplicate
some lines in the code. It can lead to some funky errors.
Otherwise, the only other error is the dispatcher going down and not
passing the updates in. This does affect all users as the queue gets
backed up until the dispatcher is turned back on.
Bastien
Sent from my iPod
On Feb 5, 2009, at 21:06, "TG" <tg-...@gryffyndevelopment.com> wrote:
So, for my purposes.. after trying a handful of solutions.. open
source and
commercial.. I think I've decided that Reliable Software's "Code Co-
op"
is what's going to work best for me.
My trial is almost up, so as soon as my next paycheck comes, I think
I'll
be purchasing the full version for $150.
For me, it's totally worth it. It stores everything in a local
database,
but allows collaboration if that's what you're into. Via email for
the
$150 version, via LAN for the $200 version.
It lets me add files by type, is easy to check out files. Anyway.. if
anyone's looking for an easy Windows version control system, check
it out.
(no, I don't work for them, just passing along the recommendation
since I'm
digging this software)
Thanks for all the input!
-TG
----- Original Message -----
From: "TG" <tg-...@gryffyndevelopment.com>
To: php-gene...@lists.php.net
Date: Wed, 31 Dec 2008 11:40:23 -0500
Subject: [PHP] Question about version control.. sorta..
Ok.. so I know about CVS and SVN and unfortunately haven't had as
much
experience with them as I'd like. I've used them, but always in a
really
basic sense and always on systems that have already been set up. A
friend
recently mentioned GIT ( http://git.or.cz/ ) too.
But here's my situation.. I deal with dozens of clients. I
usually make
a
backup copy of their site (at least the files, not usually the DB)
so I
have the latest copy of the site to make changes to. Usually I'm the
only
one working on the site, but sometimes other people may make
changes too.
Not so often than we're conflicting with our changes, or if this is a
known
issue, we make sure to coordinate.
What I'd ideally like to do is be able to use a CVS type system to
keep
incremental backups of the code. So instead of checking code out
of CVS,
changing it, then checking it back in... I'd like to just do a mass
checkin
of the whole site and have changes recorded and the ability to look
at
previous versions with DIFF and all that. And of course the
ability to
'check out' a previous set of files by date or revision maybe.
I assume you can do this with one of the major version control
systems,
but
mostly what I see with how to use these systems involves checking
code
out
then checking it back in. That's not really what I want to do.
The other issue is that I run Windows. So if there's something
nice and
WinGUI, that'd be nice. Please no "you should be running linux"
responses. I don't have anything against Linux or Mac, they're great
systems. But I have my reasons for running Windows.
Also, I realize this is semi-OT for a PHP list, but asking on a CVS
list
or a
SVN list might not give me the more comprehensive/broad experience
base
I'm
looking for. I'd like a semi-unbiased response. :)
Thanks in advance!
-TG
--
PHP General Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
Hi Louis,
>why can't the VC9 build be used with apache.org binaries?
The build from apache.org is build with VS6. If you wanna try a VS9 build
from httpd you can try the build from apachehaus.com For me it works well
on Windows 2003 and Windows 7
>why is the VC9 build compiled to used the CRT as DLLs instead of static?
For most windows users it is easier to enable a dll as extension than compile
it ;-)
>why do you have both a VC6 and a VC9 build?
I guess VS6 for compability and VS9 is the future.
regards
Mario
-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht-----
Von: Louis Solomon [SteelBytes] [mailto:lo...@steelbytes.com]
Gesendet: Fr 06.02.2009 02:48
An: php-wind...@lists.php.net
Betreff: [PHP-WIN] VC6 vs VC9
Hi,
based on comments on http://windows.php.net/qa/ ...
why is the VC9 build compiled to used the CRT as DLLs instead of static?
yet I gather the VC6 isn't?
why can't the VC9 build be used with apache.org binaries?
and why do you have both a VC6 and a VC9 build?
just curious.
Louis
--
PHP Windows Mailing List (http://www.php.net/)
To unsubscribe, visit: http://www.php.net/unsub.php
--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message ---
""Louis Solomon [SteelBytes]"" <lo...@steelbytes.com> wrote in message
news:c66c95c4b9354b6681cf7cc24f8f0...@steelbytes.local...
> Hi,
>
> based on comments on http://windows.php.net/qa/ ...
>
> why is the VC9 build compiled to used the CRT as DLLs instead of static?
> yet I gather the VC6 isn't?
I'm sure they both dynamically link to the CRT. When an application uses
numerous DLLs and they each dynamically load the CRT, the CRT code is loaded
once and all application binaries share a single memory heap. This means
memory can be malloc()ed in one DLL and free()d in another. A static link to
the CRT would not allow this, and would mean a copy of the CRT code would
exist in each DLL. (By 'not allow' I mean memory corruption and crashes.
Unfortunately the code will compile and link without incident.)
>
> why can't the VC9 build be used with apache.org binaries?
Apparently apache.org's binaries are compiled w/ VC6. Mixing
dynamically-loaded CRT versions creates a similar situation as statically
linking it: separate heaps, meaning cross-binary memory management will
cause heap corruption. Just as insidious is the possible difference in
object size between the two CRT versions. If DLL A assumes a certain object
is, say, 8 bytes and DLL B assumes 16 bytes, disaster is virtually assured.
-Evan
--- End Message ---
