Github Windows: Working with 'master' and 'gh-pages' branches

Github Windows: Working with 'master' and 'gh-pages' branches - javascript

I've got a painfully simple jQuery plugin that I've written and placed on github. I am using Github for Windows and the website itself to manage the project.
Unfortunately, if I try to include any of the .js or .css files that I've uploaded there, through the Raw links, it fails in my browser due to the MIME-type being plain/text.
So, for the last couple of hours I've been researching how to get a copy of the files, through github, that people (including myself) can link to. The first step seems to be creating a project page (gh-pages branch)... that much I have grasped.
However, all of the material I've found so far either expects you to have a UNIX-based system, or do some console-based trickery:
Examples: GitHub, SO, SO
Now, there must be a straightforward way to simply make these source files available for inclusion. I went through the automated steps of creating a 'project page' and now I'm presented with another branch that is claiming to be behind the 'master' branch, but I can't see what I'm supposed to do next. It's not even clear to me why on earth I'm required to make another branch. This whole thing seems far more complicated than it needs to be.
So, to recap:
I've created a branch in Github (using Windows app and website)
I can manage that, and update my files, without incident
I am unable to include the .js and .css files using a 'raw' links
I want to be able to include those files in a page
I'd like to do this through Github for Windows, or on the site itself
If anyone could help walk me through this, I'd appreciate it. Also, I'd expect that A LOT of others would as well.
EDIT: Here is an example of a well-known Github project that has its files available through Github:
Select2:
http://ivaynberg.github.io/select2/select2-3.4.2/select2.js
EDIT2: Okay, conceptually, I now understand why I have to create a separate branch, in order to share the files - as the source control aspects of Github aren't meant to act as a CDN, the project page simply provides a public website where you can place your files. So the question now becomes: How do I put my files from the master branch into the gh-pages branch? I'm not worried about automating it or anything right now, all I want is access to the directory structure so I can place files in there. I've tried syncing and re-syncing my branch with Github Windows, but it tells me that there's nothing to get from the gh-pages branch, even though it's "10 commits behind". What is going on?
EDIT3: Added my own answer, for what I've come up with (so far).

As mentioned, there's lots of information out there for people who are using console-based Git software. However, I could not find a single piece of info on how to do this solely through Github Windows. Well, here is the solution:
Process:
Create a project page, as described here: https://help.github.com/articles/creating-pages-with-the-automatic-generator
Unfortunately, they only have console-based solution for getting a local copy. So here's how the rest of this works in Github Windows... (assumption: project name is myproject, consisting of myproject.js and myproject.css)
After the page has been created (takes a few minutes), open up Github Windows.
In Github Windows, open the repository for the project. On the top menubar it has "in sync", "master", "tools". Click on "master" and switch to "gh-pages" branch - SO example.
When you do this, the folder C:\Users\YourName\Documents\GitHub\myproject will now display the files for the "gh-pages" branch. If you click "master", in Github Windows, it will change the folder structure to once again represent the "master" branch. This is what confused me earlier, you can't see the directory structure for both branches at the same time.
Select the "master" branch in Github Windows.
In Windows Explorer, copy myproject.js and myproject.css into a separate directory (e.g., c:\temp).
Go back to Github Windows and select the "gh-pages" branch.
Go back to Windows Explorer and cut the files you put into c:\temp and paste them into a directory like C:\Users\YourName\Documents\GitHub\myproject\myproject-1.0\
Go back to Github Windows, and you'll see "2 files to be commited". Type in your commit message and click 'Commit'.
Then click 'Sync'.
You can now include these files in your webpages, using a URL like: http://yourname.github.io/myproject/myproject-1.0/myproject.js
Obviously this is a huge pain in the ass to do it this way, if you expect to be updating the source file(s) regularly. So obviously an automated approach would be most ideal. There is an answer for this on SO here, unfortunately it involves UNIX-based scripting which I have zero knowledge of (and, truthfully, no interest in learning just for this). If anyone comes up with a more efficient way of doing this, using only the GUI-based tools, I'm sure myself and many others would be interested in hearing about it.
EDIT: This solution is obviously usurping Github's intended way of doing things, as when I click on the "gh-pages" branch on the github website it tells me that it's "5 commits ahead and 11 commits behind" the master branch, even though they have the same files. So, again, if anyone else has a better GUI-based solution to this problem, I'm all ears.

Git(hub) software for Windows is the buggiest thing I've ever used (well, besides Windows itself). Back when I used Windows, I could hardly get anything to work with Git at all.
But, anyways, to answer your question, if you open a command prompt and type in
git checkout -b gh-pages
(if it complains about branch gh-pages already existing, remove the -b.)
it should switch the branch. Then, you can launch notepad++ or whatever text editor you use (you might have to do it from the terminal, I can't remember), add the file you want, and then type in (in cmd):
git add .
This recursively adds all files in the folder to Git.
git commit -m "Add file for easy user download"
This adds the commit message.
git remote add origin git#github.com:yourusername/yourrepository.git
This adds the Github repo so you can push to it
git push origin gh-pages
This pushes your changes to Github.
And, you're all set!
You might want to read this on Git branching.

Related

how to download a js file from a server and run it?

Is it possible to run a js file locally that downloads a secondary file and then run the latter?
I know the best thing would be to download the file from the server and save it locally, I would just like to understand if there is still the possibility to do the above.
Example:
Open terminal
1- node index js
2 - download scripts js in the same directory as index.js
3 - download is complete, start script js automatically.

Even if it is possible to solve it with Node.js workarounds (like requireing your puppeteer script from an url etc.) I strongly suggest to use Git with your team to share the latest version of your script. Version control is a must in modern software development, especially if you are working in a team. By learning the 6-7 most basic git commands you can solve almost everything you need for the current use case.
There are many good tutorials how to get started with git, I recommend GitHub's https://try.github.io.
Of course: you need to convince your team to embrace the change, or in better case they are already using it for version control, so it will be familiar to them.
You will need to:
Install Git locally;
Create a new repository on a server where you can store the latest stable versions of all your scripts (if it is not an open source project make sure it is private! GitLab, GitHub and Bitbucket provides/hosts free private repositories that will suit your needs);
Share the HTTPS (or SSH) URL of the repository with your team (e.g.: https://github.com/.../puppeteer-scripts.git) which they can clone;
Make sure your changes are pushed to the remote git repository;
Your team can pull the latest changes to their local computer (it will be their responsiblity to check if there were changes in the scripts, but you can notify them as well - there are automatic notifications if one starts to "watch" a git repository);
Lastly
Git can be frightening at first sight, but it can be learned in a few days and it makes code sharing smooth within your team.
One of Git's tagline describes very well why it will solve your problem:
--everything-is-local

Git : different branches for release versions

I have a .NET solution - let´s call it bookshop, that contains multiple project: bookshop.web, bookshop.lib.
The bookshop.web is a web-application that display the content to the user. Bookshop.lib is a library that contains plenty of javascript code. The javascript code will be concated (with Gulp) to a single file with a release version number.
When I work with the solution I often change in both web and lib, and find parts of javascript code in the concatenated lib file that should not be in that particular version. We use Git and branches in our project, but the branch involves changes in both web and lib, so it is hard to separate it to only the javascript version.
Is there a way to have my solution in a Git repository, but have a branch that only affects the lib folder - and a branch that only can change the web? I want to be able to switch lib branches depending on it´s release version, without having to change the web branch.
Any advice on this working progress problem would be great.

Like explained in this topic, there's a feature in git called submodule to handle nested git repositories. I think it's the way you should take.
Another useful link ! Good read :)

How to refer JS files like componenet and use acrsoss the web application [duplicate]

In case the question wasn't clear. I have 3 MVC projects in one Solution. Every time I create a new project it adds the "Scripts" folder with all the .js files I'll ever need. I don't want to have this created every time for every application. Is there a way to reference scripts from a central folder in the solution so all applications/projects can share one common script folder with all the scripts common among them?
Edit:
Please explain the pros and cons of doing this if there are any...now I'm curious.

Here is what I would recommend:
Right click the solution and create a New Solution Folder called Common Javascript Files (or whatever you feel like calling it.
Right click on the Solution, click Open Folder in Windows Explorer,
or navigate there manually for other versions of Visual Studio :(
In the solution directory, create a directory with the same name as the solution folder (solution folders do not normally match directories at the source code level but this will for sanity sake).
In this new directory, add files that need to be shared between solutions.
In Visual Studio, click the solution folder and select Add - Existing Item.
In the file selection dialog, navigate to the directory previous created, select the file(s) added to the directory and click Add.
In each Project that needs a shared file, right click on the project (or directory within the project) and click Add - Existing Item.
Navigate to the shared Directory, Select the files and click the drop down arrow then click Add As Link.
Now the files in the projects are essentially short cuts to the files in the Solution Folder. But they are treated as actual files in the project (this includes .CS or Visual Basic files, they will be compiled as files that actually exist in the project).
PROS
Files are truly shared across projects at Design time
Only the files needed for each project can be added, it's not all or nothing
Does not require any configuration in IIS (virtual directory etc)
If the solution is in TFS Source control, you can add the Directory to the TFS Source and the shared files will be source controlled.
Editing a file by selecting it in the Project, will edit the actual file.
Deleting a Linked file does not delete the file.
This is not limited to JS files, linked files can be ANY file you might need (Images, Css, Xml, CS, CSHTML, etc)
CONS
Each deployment gets it's own file.
There is a small learning curve when understanding that Solution Folders are not Directories that exist in a Solution Directory.

The best thing to do, imo, is to roll your own CDN... Basically just create another site in IIS and give it it's own binding, e.g. "http://cdn.somedomain.com"
Then store all of your css/js/fonts/shared images etc on the CDN site and link to them from your other sites.
Doing so solves 2 problems,
All of your stuff is shared when it needs to be and you only have to manage 1 revision per file.
Your users browsers can cache them in 1 single location instead of downloading copies of your stuff for every site that uses them..
I added this answer because I see a lot of people referrencing creating virtual directories. While that does indeed share the files, it creates multiple download paths for them which is an extreme waste of bandwidth. Why make your users download jquery.js (1 * number of sites) when you can allow them to download it once on (cdn.somedomain.com).
Also when I say waste of bandwidth, I'm not just talking about server bandwidth, I'm talking about mobile users on data plans... As an example, I hit our companies HR site (insuance etc) on my phone the other day and it consumed 25mb right out the gate, downloaded jquery and a bunch of stuff 5 times each... On a 2gb a month data plan, websites that do that really annoy me.

Here it goes, IMO the best and easiest solution, I spent a week trying to find best and easiest way which always had more cons than pros:
Resources(DLL)
Shared
images
image.png
css
shared.css
scripts
jquery.js
MvcApp1
Images
Content
Shared <- We want to get files from above dll here
...
MvcApp2
Images
Content
Shared <- We want to get files from above dll here
...
Add following to MvcApp1 -> Project -> MvcApp1 Properties -> Build events -> post build event:
start xcopy "$(SolutionDir)Resources\Shared\*" "$(SolutionDir)MvcApp1\Shared" /r /s /i /y
Here is explanation on what it does: Including Build action content files directory from referenced assembly at same level as bin directory
Do the same for MvcApp2. Now after every build fresh static files will be copied to your app and you can access files like "~/Shared/css/site.css"
If you want you can adjust the above command to copy scripts from .dll to scripts folder of every app, that way you could move some scripts to .dll without having to change any paths,here is example:
If you want to copy only scripts from Resources/Shared/scripts into MvcApp1/scripts after each build:
start xcopy "$(SolutionDir)Resources\Shared\Scripts\*" "$(SolutionDir)MvcApp1\Scripts" /r /s /i /y

This is a late answer but Microsoft has added a project type called Shared Project starting Visual Studio 2013 Update 2 that can do exactly what you wan't without having to link files.
The shared project reference shows up under the References node in the
Solution Explorer, but the code and assets in the shared project are
treated as if they were files linked into the main project.
"In previous versions of Visual Studio, you could share source code between projects by Add -> Existing Item and then choosing to Link. But this was kind of clunky and each separate source file had to be selected individually. With the move to supporting multiple disparate platforms (iOS, Android, etc), they decided to make it easier to share source between projects by adding the concept of Shared Projects."
https://blogs.msdn.microsoft.com/somasegar/2014/04/02/visual-studio-2013-update-2-rc-windows-phone-8-1-tools-shared-projects-and-universal-windows-apps/
Info from this thread:
What is the difference between a Shared Project and a Class Library in Visual Studio 2015?
https://stackoverflow.com/a/30638495/3850405

A suggestion that will allow you to debug your scripts without re-compiling the project:
Pick one "master" project (which you will use for debugging) and add the physical files to it
Use "Add As Link" feature as described in Eric's answer to add the script files to the other projects in solution
Use CopyLinkedContentFiles task on Build, as suggested in Mac's comment to copy the files over to the second over to your additional projects
This way you can modify the scripts in the "master" project without restarting the debugger, which to me makes the world of difference.

In IIS create a virtual folder pointing to the same scripts folder for each of the 3 applications. Then you'll only need to keep them in a single application. There are other alternatives, but it really depends on how your applications are structured.
Edit
A scarier idea is to use Areas. In a common area have a scripts directory with the scripts set to be compiled. Then serve them up yourself by getting them out of the dll. This might be a good idea if you foresee the common Area having more functionality later.

Most of the files that are included by default are also available via various CDN's.
If you're not adding your own custom scripts, you may not even need a scripts directory.
Microsoft's CDN for scripts: http://www.asp.net/ajaxlibrary/cdn.ashx

Potential Git/Rails Disaster: Web page no longer loading

I have spent a lot of time working on a webpage and have been very lazy about committing things to Git. Today, I attempted to push everything up to my repo, but I think I may have caused a disaster. I am very new to Git and basically just use it for its most basic functions.
I was unable to push anything and the console recommended using a pull request, after doing that and attempting to push again, I began to get a bunch of merge conflicts with my gemfile and gemfile.lock. I tried fixing this issue as well but then I started seeing random <<<<<<HEAD throughout my files (including routes as well as my javascript).
Now when I try to load my localhost page, I seem to have all my content, but my css file will not load resulting in a very ugly page. When I use chrome devtools and try to look at the sources, the application.css.scss is blank, when mine have 1000+ lines of code (and is viewable in the app\assets\stylesheets folder.
Has anyone had something like this happen / know how to remedy the amount of damage I might've done in 15 min. Anything will help as I do not know how to proceed.

you'll want to try doing a git reset --hard to reset your local repo to the state it was at before you ran git pull.
see this answer for reference:
https://stackoverflow.com/a/1223385/3880374
also, in case you're curious about those "random" <<<<<<HEAD strings throughout your files, those are actually added by Git. Per their docs:
Git adds standard conflict-resolution markers to the files that have conflicts, so you can open them manually and resolve those conflicts
Github also has a helpful guide to resolving these conflicts via the command line.

Nice Menus drupal module not working in Firefox after after module is moved to /all/modules

i am currently cleaning up a messy drupal site that i will have to administer in the coming months.
My first move was to move all custom modules to /sites/all/modules
In all browsers this causes no issues, except firefox.
The Menus render correctly but do not accept mouse-input ...
When i copy the module back to /modules/ all is fine again.
I checked all the source files for hidden hard-coded references but could not find anything.
Maybe someone can get me started on where to look for solutions next?
Thanks!

You need to rebuild the system table after moving a module to a new directory. The best way to do this is drush rr You'll need to install drush and registry_rebuild modules on your system but it will rapidly rewrite your system table to match the new file structure. You should also be able to rebuild the system table by just visiting the /modules page.

Develop Reference

JavaScript is the programming language of the Web.