Forum: Ruby on Rails freeze_gems to upgrade and SVN

Announcement (2017-05-07): www.ruby-forum.com is now read-only since I unfortunately do not have the time to support and maintain the forum any more. Please see rubyonrails.org/community and ruby-lang.org/en/community for other Rails- und Ruby-related community platforms.
Jake J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 04:27
Hi all-

I just decided to move from my 1.1.0 to 1.1.2.  I had previously frozen
to 1.1.0 and therefore had all of rails in SVN in my vendor directory.

When I finally got rake freeze_gems to work, it blasted (rm -rf) my
vendor/rails directory and put a new one in there.  This also blasted
all my .svn directories.

Is there some convenient way to do a freeze upgrade and play well with
SVN?  Seems the current way requires that I do an SVN remove on all the
rails stuff, then SVN add the new stuff back in.  Is this the current
practice?

   Cheers,
   Jake
Jeff C. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 06:08
Jake J. wrote:
> Hi all-
>
> I just decided to move from my 1.1.0 to 1.1.2.  I had previously frozen
> to 1.1.0 and therefore had all of rails in SVN in my vendor directory.
>
> When I finally got rake freeze_gems to work, it blasted (rm -rf) my
> vendor/rails directory and put a new one in there.  This also blasted
> all my .svn directories.
>
> Is there some convenient way to do a freeze upgrade and play well with
> SVN?  Seems the current way requires that I do an SVN remove on all the
> rails stuff, then SVN add the new stuff back in.  Is this the current
> practice?
>
>    Cheers,
>    Jake

That's what I did.  After I tried it first the other way and ran into
the complications that come from deleting the .svn directories, I
managed to get everything sorted out by using svn remove vendor/rails
and re-adding them again.

If there's a better way I'd love to hear it :)

Jeff C.man
Jake J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 06:30
Jeff C.man wrote:
> That's what I did.  After I tried it first the other way and ran into
> the complications that come from deleting the .svn directories, I
> managed to get everything sorted out by using svn remove vendor/rails
> and re-adding them again.
>
> If there's a better way I'd love to hear it :)
>
> Jeff C.man

Yes.  I'd like to avoid the 3.8 MB commit if I can!

   Jake
Shane S. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 07:45
(Received via mailing list)
There's really no reason why you should have all of rails in your svn
repository. You should set it up as an external. You're not changing
rails
code, so it shouldnt be under your source control....
Jake J. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 08:16
Shane S. wrote:
> There's really no reason why you should have all of rails in your svn
> repository. You should set it up as an external. You're not changing
> rails
> code, so it shouldnt be under your source control....

Yeah, I'm doing this now.  When I initially looked at the external
command suggested, it seemed that it would force all of 'vendor' to be
from the rails site (and therefore not allow other vendor packages).
But this wasn't the case upon further investigation...

   Jake
Jeff C. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 10:25
Shane S. wrote:
> There's really no reason why you should have all of rails in your svn
> repository. You should set it up as an external. You're not changing
> rails
> code, so it shouldnt be under your source control....

I'm using Capistrano to deploy my app, shouldn't my vendor directory be
under version control if I want Capistrano to deploy it?

Jeff C.man
Ray B. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 10:55
(Received via mailing list)
Jeff C.man wrote:
> Shane S. wrote:
>> There's really no reason why you should have all of rails in your svn
>> repository. You should set it up as an external. You're not changing
>> rails
>> code, so it shouldnt be under your source control....
>
> I'm using Capistrano to deploy my app, shouldn't my vendor directory be
> under version control if I want Capistrano to deploy it?

google svn:external

This is a mechanism for pulling code from an external repository.

To be concrete, in your vendor dir, you do something like

svn propset svn:external
http://dev.rubyonrails.org/svn/rails/branches/stable rails

Then every time you do an svn up the external svn repository will be
used for the rails directory and sub-directories.

Rails source is not in your local svn repository. The rest of the
content of your vendor dir can be done the same way, or you can check it
into your local repository, depending on your needs.

--

Ray
Jeff C. (Guest)
on 2006-04-18 11:35
Ray B. wrote:
> Jeff C.man wrote:
>> Shane S. wrote:
>>> There's really no reason why you should have all of rails in your svn
>>> repository. You should set it up as an external. You're not changing
>>> rails
>>> code, so it shouldnt be under your source control....
>>
>> I'm using Capistrano to deploy my app, shouldn't my vendor directory be
>> under version control if I want Capistrano to deploy it?
>
> google svn:external
>
> This is a mechanism for pulling code from an external repository.
>
> To be concrete, in your vendor dir, you do something like
>
> svn propset svn:external
> http://dev.rubyonrails.org/svn/rails/branches/stable rails
>
> Then every time you do an svn up the external svn repository will be
> used for the rails directory and sub-directories.
>
> Rails source is not in your local svn repository. The rest of the
> content of your vendor dir can be done the same way, or you can check it
> into your local repository, depending on your needs.
>
> --
>
> Ray

Nice! Thanks, Ray.  I'm learning SVN as I go, and I hadn't looked at
svn:external at all.  I'll check it out.

Jeff C.man
This topic is locked and can not be replied to.