Is there a way to automatically generate Velocity Template file from a given reference implementation html file.
Right now I have to update my velocity template manually whenever there are changes in html or ts files.
Is there are way to automate this process?
The most obvious way of achieving this, assuming that most of the times HTML changes appear on lines which don't contain VTL, is to rely on a versioning system like git.
Let's say that your templatized files are under the master branch.
Create a new reference branch, overwrite the templatized files with the reference ones, and commit the result.
Since the goal is to merge reference towards master, to be able to avoid chekky-picking so as to ease the merging process, I would do a first merge from reference to master, commit it, then overwrite the result of the merge with the templatized files and commit again. The result of the operation leaves the files unchanged, but git will consider the reference branch as being already merged.
Whenever new changes in the reference branch appear, you just have to commit them in the reference branch and ask git to merge them towards master. From times to times, youll have to manually handle some conflicts.
I'm not detailing here git usage, but there are plenty of good tutorials online.
Related
To automate Perforce staging, I face a dilemma that add and edit are two different ops and they work on files of different SCM status, i.e., "already under SCM or not".
This is different from git where staging is uniformly add.
I'd like to have something like pseudo-code:
filepath = '/path/to/myfile.ext'
if p4.is_under_scm(filepath):
p4.edit(filepath)
else:
p4.add(filepath)
or better yet, simply hide the detail with:
p4.staging(filepath)
How should I achieve this with calling p4 command-line program?. I'm not using any programming-language bindings right now.
You might want to use the p4 reconcile command, which automatically opens workspace files for an action that matches their current state relative to the depot.
Keep in mind if you go this route that reconcile operates only on unopened files that are different from the depot version, so it's meant to be used after making local modifications (this is different from the standard workflow where you open a file with p4 edit prior to editing it -- the idea is that you use reconcile to fix things after the fact if you've had to work disconnected or something like that). In addition, if you change your mind about what you're doing with the file (e.g. you delete the local copy after it's been opened for edit but before you submit), you may need to revert -k it and re-reconcile to ensure that it's open for the correct action.
For something that matches the pseudocode in your question, you probably want the p4 have command, which tells you if a local file corresponds to a depot revision (and if so which one). p4 edit only works on a file that you have, whereas p4 add would be for a file in your workspace that does not correspond to an existing depot file. (A very subtle point here -- it's possible for the file to map to a depot file despite not having been synced from the depot! If that's the case you'll hit a conflict when you go to submit your add.)
I am working with Accurev and recently I was forced to perform a revert on a recent promote. I followed the general guidelines, accessed the stream's history and performed a revert action on a selected transaction.
That particular transaction involved already existent files but also new ones.
Now here comes the main problem: after the revert the existent files were returned to their previous version but the files that were at their first version appeared in the root of the stream regardless of the path where they were initially placed and were in the state Defunct. Of course this mainly visually disturbing but I am also wondering what will happen later on when someone will try to readd those same files to the stream.
Will there be a conflict, will they be repositioned where they were initially added? At this point I am thinking about reverting the revert action but it already seems really overcomplicated and it look like it would only generate more problems.
Lets say you have a stream hierarchy of: Stream1 - Stream2 - Workspace1
In this hierarchy you have a file called foo.c.
In Stream2, this file has a defunct status.
If you add foo.c to source control in a Workspace1 and promote, the defunct version in Stream2 is now stranded and the newly added appears with a member status. The stranded file will appear when you search for stranded elements.
If you try and promote the newly added foo.c, it will fail due to being an evil twin as the original foo.c still exists in Stream1.
To clear this, you can promote the stranded foo.c from Stream2 and then promote the newly added foo.c.
Hello helpful persons,
I'm working with trying to set up some new branch structures in our companies codebase for organization and sanity purposes. True to form decision makers have changed their minds and want the structure to be changed a bit from what I already have in place. Not an over-the-top request though, because no one is yet using the new structure so I have "free reign".
I need to simply move these thousands of files in the containing branch directories (//depot/main/... and //depot/dev/... respectively) into a //depot/main/[product_name]/... structure etc. which I'm on board with and understand the advantages.
While opening the files from //depot/main/... for edit and move I see in my output that there are several warning messages:
warning: edit of deleted file
and
warning: move of deleted file
How can I tell perforce that I do not want to open deleted files for edit, and in turn that I do not want to move deleted files to the new location(s)?
I have a feeling that there is some documentation that I am either not understanding or not finding properly.
Generally you only get that particular warning if you aren't synced to head and are trying to move a file. Make sure you are synced to the head revisions.
As suggested by raven you should probably be using integrate for this. Generally my recommendation is to use 'p4edit/p4 move' intra-branch and 'p4 populate/integ/copy/merge' for interbranch branch integrations.
We have a need to refactor a code base. The thing is that this will be done by one person and it would be desirable to avoid having the rest of the development team sitting idle while this job takes place.
We therefore tried the following scenario to see if it is possible to work in parallel.
Created file test.txt in directory first in developer A's workspace.
Promoted this file.
Updated developer B's workspace, thereby getting file test.txt
In A's workspace moved file test.txt to directory second.
Promoted this move.
In B's workspace edited file test.txt while it still resides in directory first (no update is made thereby emulating that work is done while refactoring is taking place).
Tried to promote and got a message saying that file test.txt had been modified (correct, file has been moved).
Tried to merge but got an error message saying that AccuRev can't merge since the file is missing in directory second (where it has been moved).
Tried to update B's workspace but that is not allowed since there is a modified file that needs to be merged first.
We are now stuck in a catch 22 situation.
We did try to place a fake file in directory second but that is not being recognized since this file does not belong to the workspace.
Has anyone out there tried something like this and gotten it to work?
It is of course possible to copy files but if there is a better way we would be grateful to hear about this. Or if this is a known bug or limitation in the tool.
We will contact also contact AccuRev support but I thought that I might be able to get some useful tips from the community.
Currently we are using AccuRev client 5.5.0.
Thanks for any suggestions on how to make the tool support this operation.
Referring to your steps 6 & 7: In AccuRev 5.5 after a file is edited and has a (modified) status you first have to keep before you can promote.
At step 8 you could try doing the merge from the Browse Versions view of the file. That way you can select any node to merge with, including the one that has been moved.
Step 9. An AccuRev update will not run successfully if one of the files to be updated is (modified). This is by design. You can keep the file so it has (kept)(member) status then run the update.
David Howland
After contact with AccuRev support the answer is that the only option available is to copy the file to some temp directory, revert the changes, update the workspace and copy the file into the new location in the workspace.
AccuRev will at least tell you which files you have to copy since they will be marked as modified.
I could experimentally verify David's remark to step 9 using AccuRev 5.5.
Let's assume that in the workspace of user A the file was moved and the move was promoted, while in the workspace of user B the file was modified and user B is about to promote his/her change.
Before the file is kept, it will not be possible for user B neither to merge nor to update. But after keeping the modified file the update is possible. The file is first marked as overlap, then the merge succeeds in the new location. Basically, this avoids creating a copy of the file, reverting it and restoring it in the new location after an update, which can be quite cumbersome, as AccuRev does not reveal easily where the move goes.
If user B promotes the modification before user A promotes the move, all goes smoothly, i.e. on update the moved file appears as overlap, but easily merges into the moved file in the new location.
Similar results are obtained when the two users have workspaces connected to different streams and the overlap occurs on a common parent stream. Only if the file is unkept, an error can occur (i.e. only if the move is promoted before the change). Then a simple keep allows to proceed as usual (update, merge, then promote).
3 files present in the backing stream in AccuRev aren't in my workspace after Updating it.
Some things I've tried:
Checked the Missing search. They don't show, with or without timestamp optimization.
Recursively populated the parent of the directories where the missing files are(n't). Got nothing.
Manually copied them from another workspace under the same stream, where they do show. Those copies appeared as External in my workspace, so I deleted them.
As per this question, did accurev show -fx wspaces. Target_trans for that workspace is the same as Trans.
Ran accurev update -9 anyway. AccuRev says everything's up to date, nothing to do.
Other possibly-relevant info:
Two coworkers with workspaces off that same backing stream have the files I'm missing.
All 3 "missing" files are in one of 2 directories that were renamed fairly recently.
The stream hierarchy is shallow, only one parent between the backing stream and the root. However, that parent stream wasn't always there. It was recently inserted, and all changes from our prior release change paletted into it, so the issues list for the backing stream would reflect only changes since the prior release, not since the beginning of time. It has had that effect, with no other anomalies I'm aware of.
I could abandon this workspace and create a new one, but I'd rather not if I don't have to. Any further suggestions would be appreciated.
Could they be excluded?
Check your include/exclude rules.
If they are not, create a new workspace. If they appear in the new workspace, just remove the old one. I have seen this issue before in the past.