I’ve seen a screenshot somewhere on the Forum of a beta version improvement to the Version History with beautiful colours, nodes, and links, and don’t know how far off this is from being published… but hopefully this proposal is a relatively small change that could be made quickly (i.e. I also suspect no new branch was created for my fellow collaborator, which would explain why only one of us could work on the Anvil app at a time, so unless anyone can spot a problem with it, it might be good to automatically create a new branch for each new collaborator as part of the Business Account’s Share With My Team function… Collaborators can then create additional branches as required using Github. I suspect this, or something similar, is actually what happens under the hood with Business Accounts when you add someone to your organisation… I’ve certainly seen email appear in a shared Version History, but it wasn’t at all clear whether this was just “an Anvil thing” or actually coming from a Github branch/ fork. A further Feature Request to avoid this might therefore be to integrate Github’s Settings, Manage Access, Invite a Collaborator function into the Anvil IDE, in order to share the original Anvil remote itself, directly and organically. I haven’t got my head around it fully, but suspect there’s still a need for creating an additional Github remote even with this change, so that other collaborators can create pull requests and branches (and forks?). If you could simply add the name of the branch and full description to the View History, and perhaps add a prominent label to show it’s been pushed from an origin/Git Clone outside of Anvil, I think you could at a stroke avoid the shenanigans several (experienced) users like have suggested in terms of cloning DEV, TEST, and PROD versions of an Anvil app (either in Anvil itself and/or on the local machine) just to emulate existing functionallity of Github branches (see Levels 3, 4, 9, and 10 in my Version Control for Dummies tutorial and this whole thread). If I hadn’t thought to explicitly mention DEV2 in my commit summary above (and why would I normally?), it wouldn’t be at all obvious where this new branch was coming from, and things would get even more confusing if I create multiple branches. It just shows a greyed-out box with the Summary of the commit and no mention of the origin. What seems to be missing and unclear to the point of being unusable in the above is that Anvil doesn’t currently import (or just doesn’t display?) the name of the local branch (‘master’ by default, then ‘DEV2’ etc) or the full Description. What’s not so clear perhaps is that the changes made in the Anvil IDE at 1:34pm have also incorporated in the 1:37pm version (I think). Notice again there’s a helpful (but not very prominent) line showing DEV2 has been merged into the Anvil remote (DEV).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |