this is a newbie question.
I've a server where I've uploaded all my work directory. It's a small project in Django.
I want to work either in locale and in remote server, but I want the both directories ever synchronized. When I'm going to work on my computer, I would the work directory to be synchronized. And vice versa.
Someone says me to use sshfs, rsync, git.
What are your recommendations? Which one should I use?
You should be using git (or another version control system) anyway, to ensure that you always have a record of the changes you make to your work. Synchronising across systems is an added benefit that you will get if you set up the git remotes properly, and always ensure that you pull from the remote when you start and push back when you finish.
Easiest answer for complete synchronization between them... Drop Box :)
But git might serve you well. Especially if you want to expand on this someday to have a QA vs. Production server that you stage changes across. That topic is a big one that's been answered a few times here. Do a search for "git production deploy" to get a list of questions around that topic.
I am aware that we can make templates of domains in weblogic very easily using config_builder script. Is there a similar thing in websphere?
I know nothing about WebLogic, but fix pack 9 for WebSphere added something you may find useful. The wsadmin command AdminTask.extractConfigProperties with GenerateTemplates and PortablePropertiesFile options set to true will generate a portable, editable file transferable to another cell. AdminTask.applyConfigProperties is used to read your edited output and apply the properties to a new cell, server, etc. I haven't tried this yet outside of a controlled sandbox environment; so, I'm not sure what pitfalls may await you. But if you have a ton of servers to build, it may be worth your time to do some experimentation.
Here's the IBM doc on the topic.
As far as i know i don't think there is such a capability.
You can use the default product shipped profiles to start with and create the servers and configure them the way you want.
These servers can then be used as a template to build other servers.
I am not sure if this helps you but i thought i would point this out.
Manglu
I would like to reuse one installation of Sitecore every time I need to make code changes. I currently have a branch to fix a problem, but now I need to create another branch to fix another problem. The problems are in different websites so I need to keep the seperate branches. I really do not want to create another Sitecore installation for this second branch. Is there a way to "swap" out these solutions and "reuse" the same Sitecore installation?
Mark Ursino's comment about removing the code got me to thinking. Since the solution binded to the Sitecore installation resides in the Website folder, I'll map both solutions to somewhere arbitrary, like "Sitecore Dev Folder", and then map the branch I'm working in to the Website folder of the Sitecore installation. When I change the mapping, the solution will download from TFS into the Website folder (blowing away the existing solutuion.) And that's how I can achieve the "swapping" of solutions.
Yep, we need more info here to really answer the question.
But... in general, I would advise you not to do this. Creating a new Sitecore installation is a piece of cake with the installer, and not exactly resource intensive. You could have it use the same DB if necessary to make things easier.
Mixing two different branches with the same Sitecore instance... it seems inevitable that something would get "F'd up", to use the technical term.
Let me first say I am aware of this faq for Mach-II, which discusses using application specific mappings as a third option when:
locating the framework in the server root is not possible and
creating a server wide mapping to the Mach-II framework directory is impossible
Using application specific mappings would also work for other ColdFusion frameworks with similar requirements (ColdSpring). Here is my issue however: my (I should say "their") production servers are all running ColdFusion MX7, and application specific mappings were introduced in ColdFusion 8. I most likely will be unable to do option 1 or 2 because they involve creating server wide changes that could conflict with other applications (I don't have a final word on this but I am preparing for that to be the case).
That said, is there anybody out there who was in similar bind and has done an option 4, in any ColdFusion version, or with any similar framework? The only option 4 I can think of is modifying the entire framework to change this hardcoded path, and even if that worked it would be time consuming and risky. I'm fairly sure that if there was a simple modification or other simple solution it would already be included in the framework (maybe it's included in version 1.8 of Mach-II and I don't know about it yet).
Any thoughts on solving this problem or even unorthodox setups with libraries that have specific path requirements would be appreciated. Any thoughts from Team Mach-II would especially appreciated...we're on the same team here Matt! ;-)
EDIT
Apparently, the ColdBox framework includes a refactor.xml ANT task which includes a target that refactors the ColdBox code to use a different absolute path as a base along with several other useful refactoring targets. So problem solved for ColdBox users.
Looking at the build.xml for Mach-II (1.6 and 1.8) I don't see any target in there that would allow me to refactor the code. I thought about creating a feature request ticket for such a task for Mach-II but frankly I don't think creating such an ANT task is a big priority for the MachII team since the need really only relates to either
a) users of ColdFusion versions below 8
b) someone who wants to use multiple Mach-II versions in the same application, a use I doubt they want to support
The ColdSpring code I have doesn't come with any ANT tasks at all, although I do have unit tests, and I bet if I poked around the SVN I'd find a few build scripts.
Using Ant tasks to refactor and retest the code, or the simpler (and sort of cop out) solution of creating a separate ColdFusion instance for the application are the best answers I've been able to come up with. I don't need this application to exist in the shared scope of other applications, so my first solution is going to be to try and get a dedicated CF instance for this application.
I'm also going to look at the ColdBox refactor.xml ANT task however and see if I can modify it to work generically to recognize and refactor CFC references with modified absolute paths. If I complete this task I'll be sure to post the code somewhere and edit create an answer to link to it. If anybody else wants to take a crack at that or help me out with it feel free.
Until then I'll leave this question open and see if someone comes up with a better solution.
Fusebox is not so strict, I think.
In XML mode (maybe I call this not 100% correcly, just mean using the Application.cfm) it's just proper include in index.cfm, something like:
<cfinclude template="fusebox5/fusebox5.cfm" />
In non-XML mode it will need proper extending in the root Application.cfc:
<cfcomponent extends="path.to.fusebox5.Application" output="false">
All you need is to know the path.
Perhaps you could create a symbolic link and let the operating system resolve the issue for you?
I've been playing with FW/1 lately, and while it may look like you need to add a mapping and extend org.corfield.framework, you can actually move the framework.cfc file into your web root and just extend="framework". It's dead simple, and gets you straight into a great framework with no mess and very little overhead.
It should be as simple as dropping the 'MachII' folder at the root of your domain (i.e. example.com/MachII). No mappings are required to use Mach-II if you just deploy at the root of the domain of your website.
Also:
Please file a ticket for the ANT task you mentioned in your question. Team Mach-II would love to have this issue logged:
Enter a new ticket on the Mach-II Trac
If you want to tackle an ANT task for us, we can get stuff like this incorporated into the builds faster than waiting to for a Team member to work on the ticket. Code submissions from the community are welcome and appreciated.
We don't keep an eye on Stack Overflow very often so we invite you to join our official community group at called "Mach-II for ColdFusion" at Google Groups. The Google Group is the best place to ask questions or comments like this if you want feedback from the Team.
Our win32 applications (written in C++) have been around for over 10 years, and haven't been updated to follow "good practices" in terms of where they keep files. The application defaults to installing in the "C:\AppName" folder, and keeps application-generated files, configuration files, downloaded files, and saved user documents in subfolders of that folder.
Presumably, it's "best practices" to default to installing under "c:\Program Files\AppName" nowadays. But if we do that, where should we keep the rest of our files? Starting from Vista, writing to the program files folder is problematic, and there seem to be a million other places that you can put different files, and I'm confused.
Is there a reference somewhere for what goes where?
Edit: To expand on questions people have asked so far:
I'm familiar with the SHGetFolderPath function, but there are lots and lots of options that you can get from it, and I can't find a resource that says "Here is exactly what each of these options is used for, and when you might want to use it".
Up until now, we've done the "All files, including saved user files, under one folder" thing, and it's worked fine - but not when people want to install the app under the Program Files folder. For some reason, the virtualization monkeying around that Vista does isn't working for our application; if we're going to be making changes anyway, we might as well make an effort to do things the "right" way, since we don't want to have to change it again in 12 months time.
Further question:
We include some "sample" documents with our app, which we update every now and again. Is it appropriate to install them into My Documents, if we'll be overwriting them every few months? Or is My Documents assumed to be totally safe for users to mess around in?
If we can't install them to My Documents, where should we put them so that users can see them easily?
Presumably, it's "best practices" to default to installing under "c:\Program Files\AppName"
Close, but not quite. Users can configure the name of the Program Files folder and may not even have a C: drive. Instead, install to the %ProgramFiles%\AppName environment variable folder.
Note you should assume you only have read access to this folder after the installation has finished. For program data files where you might need write access, use %AppData%\AppName.
Finally, are you sure yours is the only app with that name? If you're not 100% certain of that, you might want to include your company name in there as well.
The mechanisms you use to retrieve those variables will vary depending on your programming platform. It normally comes down to the SHGetFolderPath() Win32 method in the end, but different platforms like Java or .Net may provide simpler abstractions as well.
Some guidelines are in this Knowledge Base article: How to write a Windows XP Application that stores user and application data in the correct location by using Visual C++. Also, if you search MSDN for Windows Logo Program you will find documentation regarding what an app needs to do to be truly compliant.
SHGetKnownFolderPath can get you the directories you need. If backwards compatibility with XP and earlier is required, use the deprecated SHGetFolderPath
Having said that, if you app came with documentation that said "everything used by this app is in this directory" I would love it ;)
Use the Windows SHGetFolderPath() function to get the correct directories.
Edit: To reply to your other question, added in the edit: Where to put the sample files of your application does very much depend on whether your application is installed for a single user or for all users, and whether the person installing the application can be assumed to be the one who uses it.
If your program is to be used by multiple users on a system, copying stuff into "My Documents" is not going to work - the files would be accessible only for the user installing the application. Worse, if the only user of your application needed to install as Administrator, then [s]he will not have access to the files either. So unless you are fairly certain that there is only one user for your application, and they have sufficient permissions to install the application using their own account, don't use "My Documents".
IMO you should install sample files into the directory identified by CSIDL_COMMON_APPDATA. This will give you exactly one copy for all users, and since you want every user to see the original, unaltered sample files all users should consider them read-only. In fact, your setup program should probably make them read-only. Opening one of the samples will work for all users, but as soon as they try to save their modifications the application should detect that the file is read-only, and open the "Save As" dialog, pointing to "My Documents" or suitable directory inside. That will also keep all user modifications when the installer updates the sample files later on.
It is of course somewhat more difficult for the users to find the sample files. You could add a link to the samples folder to the start menu group of your application, so that access to the files is fast, and of course you should properly document everything.
For your application binaries, you can assume that you may write to the PROGRAM FILES directory (use the %ProgramFiles% environment variable to support installations other than the default English version - e.g. in german Installations this will be c:\Programme by default). Wikipedia lists the most common variables. Another option are the SHGetFolderPath or newer SHGetKnownFolderPath functions.
For User data, you should assume that the application is running with limited access rights and may only write to the user's home directory. Same applies for registry entries. This path should probably be configurable b the user, as the home directory may actually be a network server and a user might have a second disk attached for data storage. For information on the current (Vista) filesystem guidelines see this article.
Regarding plugins, this might be more complicated. The best practice seams to be offering the option to install for the current user only, and placing the plugin in the user directory, or install for all users and place the files into your program files directory (but remember to check for write permission and request elavated access if needed).
There are plenty of environment variables like: %USERPROFILE%, %HOMEPATH%, %APPDATA% all of these points to some user-specific directories, where you can put your user-specific files.
For system-wide storage you can use %ALLUSERSPROFILE%, that is the place where you should put your read/write datafiles that are not specific to any user.
Sorry I don't know the correct answer, but...
Do you have a business case for wanting to do that? Are your customers complaining that files aren't stored where they expect? Are your applications crippled in some way because you store files in non-standard locations? If not, I don't see a reason for spending time and budget to redo your file storage strategy just to meet "best" practice. If your programs just work, then IMHO you should leave them alone and spend money and time on things that matter.
There is a directory structure under c:\users for user oriented data.
There is documentation for porting apps from older windows OSs to Vista.
Check out http://www.innovateon.com and follow the links to Vista. There is documentation regarding certification that has the details on topics like this.
We have a similar app created ~10 years ago using MFC. The easiest thing to do was create a folder right off of C:\ (e.g. C:\OurApp). No install files, no special permissions, no registry changes, etc. Clients (and particularly their sys admins) LOVE it.
One other consideration - are you planning to all of a sudden change the installation folder for existing clients (assuming this is installed in many locations)? If something isn't broke, why fix it?