Are Bitbucket and Stash the same application?
As far as I understand Bitbucket was called before Stash?
How the moving from one system to the other is done?
As far as I know, the Stash was just renamed to Bitbucket.
I performed the migration from Stash to Bitbucket for one of our clients around a year ago. If my memory serves me right, the process was relatively painless. I first exported the data from Stash using the native export functionality, then I did a fresh Bitbucket install and afterwards just imported the Stash data in the freshly set up instance.
Your mileage may warry though depending on how big the repositories are and from what version are you migrating from. But I'm sure somebody at Atlassian Community forums will be able to help you out if you run into any issues. Or if you have SEN, just write to Atlassian support.
Related
Closed. This question needs to be more focused. It is not currently accepting answers.
Want to improve this question? Update the question so it focuses on one problem only by editing this post.
Closed last year.
Improve this question
I want to design a wordpress development process like in following picture:
First I want to create a bitbucket repository for my Wordpress site. From this repository all our software developers should able to clone the site to their local machines for developing. For developing all developers should have one local database to test changes.
After a developer finished a task he should be able to push his changes to the repo. When a sprint is done I want to send all changes from the repo with Jenkins pipeline/job to the test environment. At this environment a tester should be able to test all new functions with a cloned database from the prod system (including the dev changes).
When all tests are successfully done I want be able to apply the database changes to the prod system (with a SQL script) and send all changes with an other Jekins pipeline/job to the prod system.
Do you think this can work? Whats with plugin updates? Can I setup environment variables for each system so the plugin updates can be just done on the dev machine?
I'm not sure if this could work because a plugin or plugin update creates a lot of new database changes and I think I need a tool who can display all changes like Sourcetree for git.
Is there someone who has expert knowledge with wordpress and this kind of development process and can share his experience with me?
Or do you think this process is not working with wordpress? If this is true it would be realy bad because I need a process like this.
Thanks a lot!
I don't really know Wordpress, but the process you describe is definitely possible (I've implemented similar solutions on Drupal and Adobe Experience Manager, for instance).
However...
It's hard.
In a CMS project, a change/new feature can include:
a code change (PHP, CSS, JavaScript)
a database structure change (e.g. a new table)
a database content change (e.g. a copy fix, or default/test content)
a configuration change
Working out which version should get what is really hard. You want a developer to commit a change, and have that change replicated on QA with test content - but once QA sign it off, you probably don't want to promote that test content to production. And config changes should probably flow between systems but with different values for each environment.
For managing the database changes, I've found a plug-in that monitors database changes; no idea how scriptable that is.
See WP Activity Log.
What I've done in the past in similar situations is write a script that creates the database definition for each change - so a developer can run that script, and commit it as part of their code change. It requires a lot of discipline, though - you can only modify the database structure by using the scripts.
The correct answer is yes you can do this. I know WordPress, Bit-bucket, GIT, SVN, Linux, Ubuntu exceptionally well. I have built a system very similar to what you describe and use it daily.
The problem stated is the CMS can get tricky. That is true, but you need to use the correct tools for the correct upgrades. So, WordPress ALREADY has versioning and revisions built into it. The DATABASE doesn't need to be involved at all
First off. The database doesn't need to be updated unless you are updating plugins. But for strict development no DB pushes are necessary. So have your developers check files in and out of Bit-bucket. When the lead developer approves the changes have him migrate / push to the MASTER BRANCH in your REPO. Inside of bit-bucket there is a tool called GIT HOOKS. You can trigger a php file on the server every time there is a push to the production branch. What the PHP file does is simply trigger the linux command GIT PULL which will update all the code on the server with what in on your PRODUCTION BRANCH. GIT PULL will also remove any files if files were removed etc. On the server you will have a "checked out" copy of the GIT repo and on linux the credentials after the first clone will be stored. Simply have your PHP file trigger a BASH script that does a GIT PULL. Done.
No matter how many developers you have there will always need to be a set of eyes that reviews the code changes and merges those into production. I.e. that is where the Lead Developer comes into play.
FYI. The only directories in your wordpress instance that needs to be in bitbucket is the THEME DIRECTORY and the PLUGINS directory. You DO NOT need to sync the entire WP install which is pretty large.
In the case that you would be building custom Plugins, again, it is just code that is stored in the plugins directory. If your custom plugins are built correctly and require the use of Databases then when they are activated they will immediately build the WP DB's that are needed. Likewise, correctly built plugin will also drop its own custom table when uninstalled.
You will need to sync the 2 below directories.
Plugins folder resides in: wp-content/plugins/
Themes Folder is wp-content/themes/SELECTED_THEME
Any additional questions just ask and I am here.
From my experience it is always better to allow each developer to have their own Branch and to setup the the Dev server a dedicated master branch for quality control. you can check out some documentation on how to set this up https://plixxer.com/docs/server-management/website-quality-control/
basically you want to have a live server and dev server. The live server should only ever pull from the REPO and and the Dev and coders can pull or Push from the repo. My team treats the dev server as a quality checking station. If the current live code is not up to our standards the entire dev is rolled back to what is live on the master branch. When code in the master succeeds our standards we pull from the master branch onto the live server. Each developer should have their own branch for testing on their local server. Let me know if you need some help on setting up a local environment with GIT.
You will want to make a distinction around "build" and another around "release". The workflow I understand is that developers call their local workstations "dev", and pull request their work to the develop branch (you may have already read through Gitflow). Then, using your choice of CI automation, you get the latest source into a build area and do that - build it. Check out Ansible. If you have BitBucket, maybe you also want to organize your sprint with the likes of Jira? Then you have pretty seemless integration of your sprint objectives with actual branches containing the relative work/source. Ansible can help you automate builds and releases to the point where you are doing daily builds, and running the unit tests across your builds in the various integration environments.
During builds, you would have different configuration files being factored in depending on the target environment. This is how to care for environment configuration. It is part of the build process, and ideally all configuration is possible through the build. For example, a connection string might be different across the environment if you are having different databases to isolate migration of schema changes. For example, in a Angular application you would execute ng b --prod to build production and this would bring in a production configuration file during build to change the connection string (for example).
More about configuration specific to environments... you can also include post deployment scripts that get deployed and executed after files are uploaded so that they will configure the environment as required.
Ask your questions below, and I will do my best to build this out into a comprehensive guide.
We need to migrate our VSTS team project. I already saw that this is an eagerly awaited feature from the Visual Studio user Voice.
However, in our case the new team project is to be in the same VSTS account. Is there a way to do this while also keeping version control change history? Keeping the change history available as part of the old team project is unfortunately not an option as we will lose access to the old team project soon after migration.
If somebody has done this before with the help of any of the below tools, then it would be great if they can share their experience:
VSTS copy project
VSTS sync migrator
OpsHub
It's a bit unclear what you're about to migrate from where. And why you'd lose access to the existing project. And you have different options based on the current source control type selected.
One option which you could try is to create 2 new accounts and leave the whole old account in read-only state. That should leave the history available to everyone. You can then spin up as many new accounts as you want, using just the latest version of the sources.
Git
If it's a Git repository it's as simple as making a local clone of the whole repo, creating a new team project in VSTS and pushing the clone into its second home.
TFVC
If it's TFVC, it's much harder. I've used OpsHub in the past which works reasonably well, but in our case completely got stuck in a couple of strange merge situations. Those were probably created as part of work done back when that team project was hosted in TFS 2008, so you may be luckier than we were.
You could decide to move to Git as part of your migration. Use git-tfs to create a local git repository with all your TFVC history and then push that into a bare Git repository in your new team project. Or use the TFVC import tool. There's quite a bit of documentation on this subject.
The VSTS Sync Migrator supports a snapshot without history as far as I can tell. Which would not suit you.
VSTS Copy Project doesn't support TFVC, and is no option in this case.
An option that's missing from your list is Timely Migration, it supports TFVC to TFVC migrations among other options. I've used them a long time ago to copy data between TFS servers. Back then they were working exactly as advertised.
I'm an iOS developer looking to better manage the projects I am creating. I've never touched SCM before so I'm not sure which system to use.
I'd like to keep track of changes to the different apps I'm making for my boss, but also have them in a centralised place, and be able to branch off and be working on features separate from the main app and then merge the changes back in when I'm finished. All of this will be done locally (stored on an external hard disk in my office), and once versions are complete I'd like to be able to export a copy without the SCM features to send to my boss.
I've just upgraded to Xcode 4 and noticed Git is built in. I played around with both Subversion and Git, but it sounds like Git is what would fit my needs better. However, it seems to be totally different to Subversion. The Xcode 4 documentation suggests Git is best for lone developers, but that doesn't seem the case. If the git repository is inside your working copy, how on earth do you make branches of it? Where do you send your changes to? Do you copy the entire working directory and use that as your branch?
Just looking for someone to explain in plain english which SCM system would be best for a lone developer to use and any tutorials people may know of to help me understand it.
Thanks for any help!
Go for git!
The repository actually resides in your working directory. There is .git folder which contains all the data about your branches and commits and whatsoever. You can create a bare repository(only the contents of the .git folder) if you like but having both in the same place is nice, especially if you are a single developer who doesn't need distribution.
Branching in git is very easy:
# create the branch
git branch mybranch
# switch to branch
git checkout mybranch
# show branches
git branch
Git does not depend on a server like svn does. You can have distributed development by using remotes but this is not necessary.
If you like to make a copy for your boss without the git files in it do a
git archive branchname --format=zip -o tree.zip
I suggest some reading on git
Git in five minutes
Git Community Book
The Thing About Git
Branching in git is very different from SVN. Branching happens in place, in stead of in another directory.
Read this book and other resources to get a better understanding about how git works
About the centralized server, Git is a decentralized SCM. That means that every clone contains the entire repository, not only the current working directory.
That doesn't mean you can't have a central repository. On the central server you create a bare repository, and on you're local machine you clone from that repository, push and pull from that repository, often through ssh.
Ok, perhaps I'm trying to accomplish something not doable.
I am a single developer (not part of team).
I'm trying to get some kind of versioning system going. I had used CVS with XCode 3, but XCode 4 no longer has that as an option. I've heard that SVN and Git are better alternatives anyway.
Basically, I've wasted more than half a day trying to get XCode to work with SVN / Git out of the box. I do not have a server running, and would rather not expose my project on a server.
It doesn't make sense for me to have a separate user just to run the Git/SVN Servers, either.
I'm just trying to have version control using either one, in the simplest possible way.
I've tried to add Repo, using local file path (/Volumes/AAA/BBB/Repo) where I manually created the "Repo" directory. I've set the type as Subversion (and also tried Git). XCode says "Host is reachable". But, the Commit functionality is not there (Disabled). I can't import my working directory.
I just don't get it - must I have a server running in order to have SVN/Git, or can XCode just do it through command line? I much more prefer it being done over command line, since the server is complete overkill. Or, am I missing something? Maybe I'm putting in the wrong settings into XCode?
This isn't strictly an XCode 4 issue, I had the same issue with XCode3, but at least it had the CVS option - now it's gone.
With Git you don't need a central server or even a central repository unless you have multiple people on the project. SVN requires you to have a central repo & server running all the time, but with Git you can simply git init a new repo and start using it. If you don't have a central repo you will never use push, pull, or fetch.
Xcode's help mentions the following:
Choose Git or Subversion Xcode supports two SCM systems: Subversion
(often abbreviated svn) and Git. Subversion is always server-based and
the server is normally on a remote machine, though it is possible to
install one locally. Git can be used purely as a local repository, or
you can install a Git server on a remote machine to share files among
team members. The Xcode 4 installer installs the Git and Subversion
tools when you select System Tools. If you are working alone, it’s
generally easiest to use Git, as you don’t need to set up a server. In
fact, Xcode can automatically set up a Git repository for you when you
create a new project (see “Create a Git Repository For Your New
Project”). For a group project, the choice of Subversion or Git is
usually a matter of taste and prior experience. In so far as is
possible, Xcode provides a consistent user interface and workflow for
users of either Subversion or Git.
So the official advise is that in your case, Git is the easiest solution. I'm now in the same position as you described and will be trying Git as advised.
Previously, when working for a small company, we used a dedicated leftover MacMini as an SVN server; this was quite easy to set up, and worked like a charm for many years. Be aware that the SVN integration of Xcode 3 was better than that of Xcode 4 though, so that I ended up using Xcode 4 for development and basic SVN usage, together with Xcode 3 for SVN stuff that Xcode 4 wouldn't do anymore.
I'm working on a program that shall have an "updates" module (online). I can't figure out how to do this. Initially i'm trying with a SVN repository. Any better idea? How is this normally done?
(I'm not asking for a concrete languague, i only want an general idea about the procces)
Thank you.
What we do (in an intranet environment) is roughly:
We have an application that (instead of directly starting) points to a little script that fetches the latest 'publicized' version from a known location using rsync.
Then the script simply bootstraps the application itself.
This way:
Everyone always works with the same version of the software.
New builds are easy to deploy: just copy them over to the known 'sync' location.
Using rsync or similar allows you to minify overhead since it works incrementally.
We force the upgrade upon our users, but this mechanism could also be adapted for online (on-demand) updates.