I am working on a Symfony 2 WebApp. The WebApp has been online for about two years, now I would like to update the design. This work should be outsourced to a 3rd party.
Of course the designer needs access to all styles (sass files) and templates (twig files) to work on the design. How can I do this, without giving him access to the complete rest of the project as well?
At first the questions seems obvious: Create an user account (e.g. FTP) that allows access only for the style/image/template folders.
Problem is, that I do not have a root server on which I could specify user access for individual folders. The access control I can us is quite limited: A FTP user can only be limited to a root folder but than has access to all child folders. SSH users cannot be limited to any folder at all.
Setting up a root server with full access control to let the designer do his job would be possible of course. However I consider this solution to be an overkill.
Another solution would be to create a special branch of the project which all important/confidential source code remove. Of course the branch would still have to be usable but with a limited feature set. This would be possible but more work than doing the design on my own.
Long story short: Is there any standard way of letting 3rd parties work dedicated parts of a Symfony project without giving them access to the whole project?
EDIT:
Of course the designer needs some kind of access to a running instance/copy of the web app. Giving him a standalone copy of the templates/styles folder would be possible and secure (no other code is made public), but in this case it would be impossible to view the result of changes.
Taking into account comments under the question, I would suggest to create FTP user with restricted access to only his home directory.
Then put there all directories that he needs. Something like this:
/ftpuser_home
/views
/web
/sass
/anything-other
Last step is to symlink each of these directories to the running project instance directory under appropriate paths like
/ftpuser_home/views => /var/www/symfony/app/Resources/views
And so on.
This way they can work with your project. Once they're finished, you simply remove symlinks, physically move directories back to the project directory and commit changes to git.
Note: It could look like it would be easier to do it vice versa, which is to create symlinks in /ftpuser_home not in project directory, but you probably would come across permissions issues.
You you're not afraid of them and know how to solve them, then it may work even better.
Related
My searching skills seem to be failing me on this one. It is a simple question;
In ASP.NET is it possible to store class files in a folder not under app_code?
What I am trying to accomplish is create class files which when added (or modified) to the web site will not cause the web site to restart. Anything under App_code or in the bin folder causes a restart. We are not using .NET for the presentation layer.
My reason is simple, we make changes somewhat regularly, and I do not want to wait until a specific time to add/change a feature. These are 24 hour websites and there is no great time to restart them.
Edit:
I am using FluorineFX to access the middle tier. I created a folder called "ProdCode" from the root of the application. When I try to access the NameSpace ProdeCode, class Employee_Calendar method getEvents. I get the error "Failed to locate the requested type ProdCode.Employee_Calendar"
Well, the goal of a non-restart is huge different, and HUGE separate from that of being able to place code modules, or class modules in some other folder.
When you build the project, most of the modules (and class ones) are crunched down to a single .dll anyway.
So, while you are free to add new folders and inside of those folders add new code/class modules? That may not well eliminate the need for the site to re-load, or in fact the site to re-compile the code again.
All of the app_code, and any other code module will crank out and result in a single .dll file. So, I don't see how you going to gain, or win anything new here.
What you could perhaps do is build some classes outside of the project, compile them, and then set a reference to the external code (and class) modules in the other project. That would suggest a external .dll. This would work during debugging, but an "il-merge" usealy occurs when publishing as non debug, and thus the gazillion .dll's are merged into one.
So, separate out code - great idea.
Adding code to additional folders - sure - no problem (do right click on the given class, or code module and make SURE the build action is compile - this is a default for app code - for other folders I can't remember. You need to check this.
so, up to this point? Hey, all great.
But, to save site re-compile time? No, this where train is flying off a big broken bridge, and the whole she-bang is crashing up in a HUGE ball of flames.
You might be able to same some time during debugging, but those included module are pulled into the "main" .dll (same name as your applcation). Go check the "bin" folder now - you not see the app_code .dll's but only one main .dll with the name of your project.
Such re-compile time is useally rather fast for the site to re-load. I you are just changing markup, then fine. But the idea that you want to include compiled code, and attempting to avoid a re-load? No I would not consider this - even if you could! I mean, how many times have you seen code fail or NOT take even after a publish and FORGETTING to re-start the web server? Those .dll's are often loaded into memory, locked and 100+ more issues exist. I many a time lost half a day because my .dll's did not take (due to me not re-starting the web server). there is pain and then there is this kind of "pain" in which parts of your application don't load. I just can't imagine the risk vs rewards in trying to save some time??? - I must be missing something here?
In a LabVIEW project, when should I use virtual folder and when should I use auto-populated folder? Why?
You don't have to use either. Your project could just have a main VI and have everything else handled automatically as a dependency.
Personally, I would suggest viewing the project window as a logical organization tool for your work and say that you should only put the things you actually need or want to access from there.
The conclusion from this is that you should generally not use auto-pop folders, as you don't need that. If you want to see the disk hierarchy, you can go to the files tab in the project window.
You can use virtual folders for your logical organization. For example, you might want to have support files for your builds (like an icon for the EXE) and putting those in a folder cleans up the project. Another example might be that you have a library (like a class) and you want to group subitems in that library into some logical groups. You can create virtual folders inside that library.
The one place where I do use auto-pop. folders is if I have some dynamically loaded VIs or another list of files which are placed in the same folder. Adding that folder to the project as auto-pop allows it to be handled cleanly.
It is your choice. How do you want to manage your files?
For myself, the answer is “never ever use auto-populating folders.” Those folders do not play well with libraries or classes (by design, not because of a bug), and they make it hard to remove items from a project but keep the files around (because deleting from the folder is automatically deleting from disk). There are plenty of others who agree with me. But they are nice for simple apps that don’t use any modern software design tools.
We're a small team starting to use TortiseSVN to manage our web projects.
I was just wondering what is the best way to manage web projects into Subversion.
As you know a web solution consists of the .sln file as well as all the .aspx files.
Well we noticed when we right click the solution and we select "Add selected projects to subversion". It prompts me to tell it where to store the .sln file. So I give it some path like svn://serverName/CIS/MyWebSiteProject. Cool it just placed the .sln file...so I thought to myself how is it going to store the .aspx files as well.
Within a second I got a second prompt, I thought cool it is prompting me for the .aspx pages. So I tried giving it the path svn://serverName/CIS/MyWebSiteProject/ASPX_Files, but it comes back with an error stating I cannot place this folder within this path. I actually have to go outside of the folder MyWebSiteProject.
Not good cause now I have 2 folders one with the .sln folder and the other with all the .aspx pages and these folders are sitting on:
(sln file):
svn://serverName/CIS/MyWebSiteProject
(aspx files):
svn://serverName/cis/myWebSitePages
This really is not ideal cause I am sitting on the root of CIS with 2 folders for really one solution. Now when I try to check the project out I have to check both folders out.
What makes this even worse is when I do check them out I try to open the .sln file and I get an error that it cannot find the corresponding .aspx files. This seems like too much work, is there an easier way or a recommended way of using tortisesvn/subversion with asp.net web projects ?
While I am sure you have TortoiseSVN installed, it sounds like you are using Ahnk or some other VS SCC plugin to add from within VS.
I would suggest not using the plugin to initally add the solution to SVN, but to use TortoiseSVN in Windows Explorer for your initial check in. This will add your solution directory in its original state.
From that point on, you should be able to use the SCC plugin from within VS without trouble.
EDIT
Ok, after your commment I realize that I was not fully understanding the problem.
If you are dealing with a single project, after you create your solution and project, select the solution in Solution Explorer, go to 'file>save solution as' and save the solution inside the directory where your project file is.
Close the solution and go out to Explorer and use Tortoise to add the directory to SVN. If you have multiple projects/sites, just pick one to hold the solution.
Does that make sense? and from that point you should have no problems with ahnk
The key to successfully using Visual Studio with any source control is to put the solution file in the same path as the rest of the project files.
Usually, I will do something like the following:
\Project\Project.sln
\Project\MainWebSite\*.* <-- All web site files (including .??proj here).
\Project\Library\*.*
Then, I manually put \Project\*.* into source control.
Other options exist, as for my recent projects, I have been using:
\Project\SolutionFiles\Project.sln
\Project\MainWebSite\*.*
\Project\Library\*.*
Again, I manually put \Project\*.* into source control.
I generally find that it is better to set up the repositories for my solutions and projects from within Tortoise SVN. Then use whatever VS plugin that you care for to manage the commits of your pages etc. This gives you a little more control and allows you to get your setup correct from the start.
Right now I'm working with an ASP.NET website that automatically generates images and stores them in a temporary folder. When working on my local system these go going into a temporary folder that gets picked up by Visual Source Safe which then wants to check them in. As such, I am wondering if there is a way to just exclude that particular folder from source control?
I've done a bit of reading and found that there are ways to do this for individual files, but I haven't found anything yet about an entire folder.
I think you've found one of the main reasons MS went back to projects in VS2008 and in MVC.
It's been a long time since I've used VSS (mainly because it's really out of date now), but most source providers let you exclude files and folders as a setting of the provider, rather than the project under control.
If you can switch to a Web Project rather than a WebSite then do so, otherwise I'd look at updating your source control provider, as this sort of exclusion is easy with Vault, CSV, SVN, Git, VSTS and so on (to name but a few).
Are you using ASP.NET Website or ASP.NET Web Project? The difference is significant enough to solve or promote this problem.
Websites, love to scan the file system and auto checkin.
Projects, checkin only what you tell them to.
Also Visual Source Safe is pretty out dated, most recent source control systems allow you to do what you are asking. SVN and TFS 2008 SP1 do from my experience.
You can also try to right click and pick "Exclude" on the folder, but in the case of a Website I believe this renames the folder.
I'm not sure if this is an option for you, but if you exclude your temporary folder from VSS (delete the folder inside VSS using the VSS UI), the files that go into it should not get "picked up" again.
If you perform operations on a parent project of the temporary folder, you may try cloaking the folder.
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/x2398bf5(VS.80).aspx
I would suggest emptying/deleting your folder from your website. Have your website on startup create/verify the folder, and on shutdown to clean it up and remove anything in it. This can be DEBUG code only (wrap in #if DEBUG) if so needed. Also add a build script to your project that does this every time it is built also.
Could you just make your application write to a temporary folder that is outside of your website?
e.g. in C:\tempfiles
VSS shouldn't be able to pick it up then.
As part of improvements to our build process, we are currently debating whether we should have separate project/solution files on our CI production environment from our local development environments.
The reason this has come about is because of reference problems we experienced in our previous project. On a frequent basis people would mistakenly add a reference to an assembly in the wrong location, which would mean it would work okay on their local environment, but might break on someone else's or on the build machine.
Also, the reference paths are in the csproj.user files which means these must be committed to source control, so everyone has to share these same settings.
So we are thinking about having separate projects and solutions on our CI server, so that when we do a build it uses these projects rather than local development ones.
It has obvious drawbacks such as an overhead to maintaining these separate files and the associated process that would need to be defined and followed, but it has benefits in that we would be in more control over EXACTLY what happens in the production environment.
What I haven't been able to find is anything on this subject - can't believe we are the only people to think about this - so all thoughts are welcome.
I know it's anachronistic. But the single best way I've found to handle the references issue is to have a folder mapped to a drive letter such as R: and then all projects build into or copy output into that folder also. Then all references are R:\SomeFile.dll etc. This gets you around the problem that sometimes references are added by absolute path and sometimes they are added relatively. (there's something to do with "HintPath" which I can't really remember)
The nice thing then, is that you can still use the same solution files on your build server. Which to be honest is an absolute must as you lose the certainty that what is being built on the dev machine is the same as on the build server otherwise.
In our largest project (a system comprising of many applications) we have the following structure
/3rdPartyAssemblies /App1 /App2 /App3 /.....
All external assemblies are added to 3rdPartyAssemblies/Vendor/Version/...
We have a CoreBuild.sln file which acts as an MSBuild script for all of the assemblies that are shared to ensure building in dependancy order (ie, make sure App1.Interfaces is built before App2 as App2 has a reference to App1.Interfaces).
All inter-application references target the /bin folder (we don't use bin/debug and bin/release, just bin, this way the references remain the same and we just change the release configuration depending on the build target).
Cruise Control builds the core solution for any dependencies before building any other app, and because the 3rdPartAssemblies folder is present on the server we ensure developer machines and build server have the same development layout.
Usually, you would be creating Build projects/scripts in some form or another for your Production, and so putting together another Solution file doesn't come in the picture.
It would be easier to train everyone to use project references, and create a directory under the project file structure for external assembly references. This way everyone follows the same environment.
We have changed our project structure (making use of SVN Externals) where each project is now completely self-contained. That is, any references never go outwith the project directory (for example, if Project A references ASM X, then ASM X exists within a subfolder of ProjectA)
I suspect that this should go some way towards helping solve some of our problems, but I can still see some advantages of having more control over the build projects.
#David - believe it or not this is what we actually have just now, and yet it's still causing us problems!
We're making some changes though, which are forced upon us due to moving to TeamCity and multiple build agents - so we can't have references to directories outwith the current project, as I've mentioned in my previous answer.
Look at the Externals section of this link to see what I mean - http://www.dummzeuch.de/delphi/subversion/english.html
I would strongly recommend against this.
Reference paths aren't only stored in the .user file. A hint path is stored in the project file itself. You should never have to check a .user file into source control.
Let there be one set of (okay, possibly versioned) solution/project files which all developers use, and the Release configurations of which are what you're ultimately building in production. Having separate project files is going to cause confusion down the road, when some project setting is tweaked, not carried across, and slipped into production.
You might also check this out:
http://www.objectsharp.com/cs/blogs/barry/archive/2004/10/29/988.aspx
http://bytes.com/forum/thread268546.html