I'm moving the Mercurial repositories for all my open-source projects to OSDN (OSDN.net) from Bitbucket because Bitbucket will soon drop support for Mercurial. However, OSDN only supports SSH, not HTTPS, as a file exchange protocol, and ReadTheDocs does not support SSH URLs. The ReadTheDocs public API allows builds to be triggered, but does not support any way to provide the source files with the build trigger.
Or any documented way, at least. Does anybody know of a way to either push document source files to RTD with a build trigger, or connect an OSDN repository to RTD so that RTD can clone the source files itself?
Thanks.
OSDN does support both SSH & HTTP(S), for "writing" the only option is ssh. However, read-the-docs needs only to 'read'; https is fine (And supported, although a bit hard to find).
On OSDN, toggle the "RO|r/w" button, to see the other-URL. It's not a button, nor trigger; but it looks like it --The UX/UI design isn't very great ...
Copy that RO value (again: ignore the UI-feedback. You can copy the https-URL. And past it on RTfD.
Note: for now, I could get webhooks/integration working. So, you have to go read-the-docs to rebuild, after a push. Or use the curl webhook from e.g a Makefile locally, see: https://docs.readthedocs.io/en/stable/webhooks.html#parameters
Related
I am using Jenkins for our build server. I have multiple projects using the same Mercurial (Hg) repository and want to avoid each project cloning it's own local repo to build from (since the repo is rather large). This is supposed to be possible via Jenkins and the Mercurial plugin.
In my Mercurial plugin configuration I have checked both "Use Repository Caches" and "Use Repository Sharing". In each project, the same repository location (a network location specified via IP address) is listed.
However, each project still seems to want to create a clone of the repository. Any ideas?
In our setup (using Jenkins 1.506), I've defined a custom workspace under the Advanced Project Options for each of my builds, typically at [project]\repo and then build from there into a \build\ folder.
If you define the custom workspace for each Jenkins project to point to the same shared custom workspace using the same source for the repo it will reuse what is already there.
I've not tested this, but I would assume that under this setup, it is important to prevent concurrent builds from occurring in the same working directory. Bad things would follow.
As a followup question: What is your rationale for not wanting each build to have its own source code?
I work with a partner on an PHP site for a client. We have a common Mercurial repository (on Bitbucket), both local copies and the live site. We have only FTP access to the live site (which can't be changed since it is a hosting package with FTP only).
I want to be able to push changes from the repository to the live site.
Until now I simply keep track of changed files in the repo and copy them manually with FileZilla - a error prone and annoying task. My idea is, to mount the remote location locally (i.e. using CurlFtpFS) and tell mercurial to automagically copy changed files to the site. Ideally I want to be able to specify which changes but this would be a bonus. It would be sufficient if the local state of the files within the repo are synced.
Is there any good way to do this using linux commandline tools?
My first recommendation is, if at all possible, get a package that allows more access. FTP only is just brutal.
But since you are looking for a real answer to your question, I have two ideas for you:
I would suggest looking into the mercurial FTP Extension. I personally have never used it since I have never gotten myself stuck in a ftp-only situation (not for a long time at least), but it looks promising. Looks like if you make sure that you tag your production releases it will work really well for you. (make sure to use the -uploaded param)
Also, if you only ever want the tip to be installed on your production env, then you could look at the suggestion Martin Geisler made on the bitbucket user group a few days ago. Basically his suggestion is to utilize bitbucket's "ping url" functionality. You would have to write a server-side script/url handler that would accept that ping, then fetch the tip from bitbucket (as a zip) and then unzip/unpack it. This is a bit complicated, but if you are looking for complete automation and the tip will always be the best this could work for you.
One notion is the use the hg archive command:
hg archive /path/to/curlftpsfs
which will put a snapshot of your repo in that location -- it will however overwrite any file already there.
Another option is to create a Mercurial clone in that same /path/to/curlftpsfs and then just do a hg pull ; hg update in it on your local system with the remote one mounted. Setting that up initially will mean transferring the whole thing but subsequently you'll only be sending deltas.
Some folks don't like this last options because it exposes your entire /.hg repository too, but you can block access to that at the web server.
I came across this problem a while ago after switching from AWS to a local web hosting that provides only ssh/ftp.
My previous approach of updating a production site on AWS using "hg pull; hg update -C" can no longer be used on the new web hosting. They don't have mercurial installed for shared hosts.
So, what I did is to mount the remote location using ftp, to a local machine (i.e. your laptop), then run the hg pull and update commands locally on your machine at the path where has the remote ftp site mounted.
Windows solution:
BeyondCompare (http://www.scootersoftware.com/) is an awesome piece of software. Apart from being awesome it can mirror your local folder to the FTP site. It's comparing files and only transfers what's new.
I use TextMate to do my HTMl,PHP,JS/Other languages and CSSEdit to do my CSS.
I want to integrate TextMate with Transmit better because at the moment I work like this:
TextMate: Edit code
Transmit: Look for folder and drag to online server
Firefox: Refresh page
Rinse, Repeat.
It feels very clunky to me and I do the same with CSSEdit (although CSSEdit's live preview means that I only have to upload once) but I would like to be able to, on save, have Transmit upload the edited document to the relevant place on the server (given that linked browsing is enabled).
Does anyone have a certain workflow that they follow or macros enabled in TextMate to do such tasks as they would certainly make my life a lot easier, Coda is also an option instead of TextMate if needed.
Being able to have Versions/Git-Tower auto commit on save would be great too.
I recommend #Adam's solution for the uploading part of your question but why are you using Git and Transmit simultaneously? Why not Git for everything?
My workflow:
On my machine I keep a Git repository where I do all the work. The working directory is served by MAMP so that I can test my code before commiting anything.
When I'm satisfied I commit my latest changes until I think the branch I'm working on is stable.
When I'm ready, I push to the server where a post-commit hook checks out the latest version to what the "pre-prod server".
When everything has been tested to death, branches merged and so on I check out manually the repository to the "prod server".
No need to use an FTP client at any point, everything is done from the editor (TextMate before, Vim now).
If you set up a site in Transmit, and open the local directory that holds your files, you can activate the Textmate Transmit bundle by typing ctrl-shift-f. Then hit either 1 or 2. 1 will upload the current directory, 2 will send the current file.
You might consider using Transmit's ability to mount FTP servers as volumes and simply edit the files directly on the server. To TextMate the mounted FTP server will appear to be just another volume. Search the help files for Transmit Disk, their name for this feature.
I know it is not possible to create Mercurial repositories remotely using HTTP(S), for instance:
$ hg init https://host.org/repos/project
or
$ hg clone /path/to/local/project https://host.org/repos/project
But, what's the reason? Security issues? No need for it? Simply because nobody has implemented it yet?
Rationale for this question: In my company we share most resources via HTTPS, i.e. access permissions are managed by Apache only and regular users cannot login via SSH on the server. That's just perfect as long as repositories need to be served only (for that purpose we are happy with hgwebdir.cgi). However, we also want to allow the remote creation of repos, without the need to maintain additional/patched scripts on the server and extra tools on clients.
To be clear: This question does not ask for solutions to our particular problem but for the reason why Mercurial does not support this feature itself.
UPDATE
Here's a more technical description of the situation I'm thinking of. Supposed hgwebdir.cgi serves a collection of repositories in /path/to/repos at https://.../repos (with pushing enabled). Every user allowed to access this URL (as configured in Apache) may pull and push changesets, effectively this means that hgwebdir.cgi (and thus hg) edits and creates files below /path/to/repos. Now, what's the barrier in letting hgwebdir.cgi also create new repositories below /path/to/repos?
I think the reason is that adding support for creating repositories will bring in a fair amount of baggage:
if you can create repositories you would expect to be able to delete them. While that might seem simple, it would be a big step away from the safe manner in which Mercurial normally works -- there is no destructive commands in standard Mercurial.
people would also want to edit the .hg/hgrc files to set the description and contact information -- standard Mercurial never changes the config files, so this would again be a new thing.
people would also want to manage users' access to the new repositories -- this means editing .htaccess files or the equivalent for other webservers.
... and so on. Implementing this "little" feature will open up for a lot of extra feature requests and we only have a few Mercurial developers that are also sawy web developers.
However, there is now an excellent open source solution: Kallithea gives you a "mini-Bitbucket" that you can deploy on your own server. It will do all of the above. I would install that on my server if I needed something more powerful than plain hgweb.cgi. It supports both Mercurial and Git.
As far as I know, none of the SCM alternatives allow the creation of remote repositories natively. SVN, CVS, Git, et al.
That's usually the job of a hosting provider: SourceForge, Google Code, BitBucket. All of them implement the repository creation on top of their authetication infrastructure.
For example, Debian's Mercurial hosting is limited to Debian Developers, and to create a new repository you need to login via SSH to the server and create the repository on your local home folder, much like Apache's public_html directory.
Various answers (including your own) give some pretty good reasons why the functionality isn't there (separation of concerns mostly), but if you really want to add it you could do so with just a line or two of shell. Here's a hideously unsafe example I gave quite a while ago showing how to add that funcionality in high trust environments: Remote Repository Creation in Mercurial over HTTP
I would like to have a mercurial repository on my website so that I can push/pull as I make updates to it, but I do not have SSH access, only HTTP or FTP.
Can this be done?
I suspect no, since I would not be able to run hg on the server, so I would only be able to clone it.
Yeah, this can definitely be done. You don't need ssh access to install mercurial or to access it. You compile it on your own system and then FTP up the resulting file. The only real requirement is that the website to which you upload it allow CGI applications to run. Without that you're limited to the static-http repositories, which don't support pushing.
You're correct. If you can't install software, you could use the static-http option, but it only supports cloning/pulling. See the comparison of publishing mechanisms.
You can setup hgweb to allow pushes.
I'm also using only FTP to update my site, but I keep all the files in a local Mercurial repo (you could use a repository on bitbucket - they have a free plan that includes 1 private repo and 1 GB of available space). When you need to add/update something, apply the
changes locally, update the Mercurial repo, and then use FTP to update the website.