So I am a noob. Looking back I don't know what I was thinking. But I just realized I have uploaded my wp-config file for WordPress to GitHub. Which means my access keys and database login is out for the world to see. In the short term I have converted the repository to private. But I need to figure out how to remove the file from all of the repositories commits. I found this, https://help.github.com/articles/remove-sensitive-data/ but I am afraid that I don't quite understand it and I am not sure how to use it. I have Git Shell but I have only really used the GitHub software. Can anyone walk me through the steps to take? Or am I better off deleting the entire repository and starting over?
Even if you converted it to private, it was online for a while. Check their red mean danger text:
Danger: Once you have pushed a commit to GitHub, you should consider
any data it contains to be compromised. If you committed a password,
change it!
Change the password, then try this repo cleaner:
https://rtyley.github.io/bfg-repo-cleaner/
You'll need java. If you consider it too much work just delete and recreate the repo, but change the exposed password anyway.
Related
In the course I am taking, Github is being linked with R. But in the executable svn section I cannot put anything. And I don't know if I have to download something or what I'm supposed to do. In the course they do not explain anything about that point, which makes me think that it is something obvious or simple, but I have no idea about it.
Sorry for the inconvenience.
If this is about linking GitHub and RStudio, then you don't need to set anything in the SVN field.
Having specified the Git executable is enough.
Make sure your public SSH key is registered to your GitHub account.
The OP reports:
A friend told me to right click on the r icon and run as an administrator
That means the SSH keys might have been accessible only from admin account, as opposed to regular user account.
I am looking for a solution that would allow me to have a network share where people can access (read-only) the artifacts from an Artifactory repository.
Why? We use Artifactory to also keep track of big binaries like installation kits, ISO images and so on and it takes a lot of time to download all of them (sometimes as zips), unpack and run them. If these would be exported to a NFS/SMB share people would be able to only mount them in order to use them.
How can we achieve this? Please keep in mind that we also want to automate this, so the files would be updated by Artifactory when needed.
Artifactory supports WebDAV out of the box.
It seems that's not possible at this moment and there is a feature request for enabling it:
https://www.jfrog.com/jira/browse/RTFACT-8302
Feel free to vote and to comment on it, allowing jFrog to realise how important is this use case.
I guess they should be able to provide a script that does mirror/sync a repository to a NFS share but that would almost double the storage space needed.
Instead if they would use hardlinks or symlinks to create a browsable tree of the repository inside the storage directory, this would be solved and no sync will be needed.
Everything I have read so far, it seems as though you copy the DB from assets to a "working directory" before it is used. If I have an existing SQLite DB I put it in assets. Then I have to copy it before it is used.
Does anyone know why this is the case?
I can see a possible application to that, where one doesn't want to accidentally corrupt database during write. But in that case, one would have to move database back when it's done working on it, otherwise, next time program is run will start from "default" database state.
That might be another use case - you might always want to start program execution with known data state. Previous state might be set from external application.
Thanks everyone for your ideas.
I think what I might have figured out is that the install cannot put a DB directly to the /data directory.
In Eclipse there is no /data which is where most of the discussions I have read say to put it.
This is one of the several I found:
http://www.reigndesign.com/blog/using-your-own-sqlite-database-in-android-applications/comment-page-4/#comment-37008
Having read this past question for git, I would like to ask if there exists something like that, but
can be done programmatically (file list) on each machine;
works for Mercurial.
The reason for this is that I would like to include in my public dotfiles repository some configuration files that store password in plaintext. I know I could write a wraparound script for hg(1) but I would like to know if there are alternative approaches, just for the sake of curiosity.
Thank you.
You could use a pair of pre-commit and post-update hooks to encrypt/decrypt as necessary. See http://hgbook.red-bean.com/read/handling-repository-events-with-hooks.html for more details.
However, it's worth pointing out that if you're storing encrypted text in your repo you'll be unable to create meaningful diffs -- essentially everything will be like a binary file but also poorly compressible.
Mercurial has a filter system that lets you mangle files when they are read from the repository or written back. If you have a program like the SSH agent running that lets you do non-interactive encryption and decryption, then this might just be workable.
As Ryan points out, this will necessarily lead to a bigger repository since each encrypted version of your files will look completely different from the previous version. Mercurial detects this and stores the versions uncompressed (encrypted files cannot be compressed anyway). Since you will use this for dotfiles, you can ignore the space overhead, but it's something to take into consideration if you will be versioning bigger files in encrypted form.
Please post a mail to Mercurial mailing list with your experiences so that other users can benefit from them too.
Our code is in SVN. We develop using Visual Studio and the AnkhSVN plugin.
Having used VSS before SVN I was used to the idea of locking files so other users know not to edit it while you are (in fact I thought this was the main point of source control, to prevent lost data from these conflicts).
I've been told this rarely happens and cases where you can't work because another dev is locking you out are more frequent (which sounds like a principle that might only apply to a certain subset of dev projects). But anyway, SVN is better and we're using it.
So when I do edit a file, and go to check it in, and find out the other user has edited it too, what do I actually do?
Surely there's a better way than saving a copy of my file, reverting changes, updating it from server, then merging my changes back in with winmerge? When I right-click the file and click 'merge' I'm told I should update first, so that's obviously not what I need.
.
Update: partial answer
OK, it sounds like I just hit update, then SVN merges non-conflicting changes automatically, and should let AnkhSVN know about any conflicting changes to allow some kind of resolution. Does anyone know how this works in AnkhSVN - what I'd actually do?
(if not I'll try it myself, accept the current top answer and update this question with the second half for posterity).
Actually, that's exactly what you need.
Edit: Clarification, what you need to do is just hit that update. You don't need to make a separate copy, revert, etc. Updating from the repository will merge those changes with your own.
When you do the update, where you have local changes to a file that has also been changed in the repository, SVN will merge the file in the repository with your local file, preserving both sets of changes.
In effect, it should do what you would do with Winmerge automatically.
If the changes are conflicting, typically that they occur within the same lines, there will be a merge conflict, which has to be resolved. Not knowing AnkhSvn, I don't know what it will do in this case, but it should have some means of fixing things. Usually it involves looking over 3 files (your local file, the repository file, and the result of a successful merge) where you pick each part you want to keep from the two changed versions of the file.
After you've updated your local copy, merged and fixed any conflicts, you commit as usual.
It´s not an direct answer to your question, but I would recommened to use SVN-Monitor in addition to AnkhSVN or any other Subversion client like TortoiseSVN.
With it you can watch your repository and will be notified by changes in your repository. So you can see what other devs did in the repository and probably see if your commit will conflict with other checkins or if you can update your local copy without any effect/conflict