Re: Git - Pushing to a production website
- From
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. <bss@iguanasuicide.net>
- Date
- Jan 10, 2009, 04:38 UTC
- Message-ID
- <200901092238.06968.bss@iguanasuicide.net>
- In-Reply-To
- <20090109222344.3539138a@family.dyweni.com>
On Friday 2009 January 09 22:23:44 4jxDQ6FQee2H@dyweni.com wrote:
>Our company's website is stored in a GIT Repository.
Interesting. I like the thought.
Show 15 quoted lines
>The repository is coded for our test server. When we push updates to >the production server, have manually run a script to patch several >files to make the code work on the production server (i.e. port >numbers, etc). > >I'd like to write a script to email me whenever someone changes files >on the production server without checking those changes back into git >(i.e. running 'git status | grep "nothing to commit" ...'). > >However, this approach get confused by the files patched to work >correctly. > >Is there any way to 'save' those patched files so they don't get >reported by 'git status', yet not mung up the git history every time >we push out an update?
You could simply commit after running the perl script. You could even commit to a branch so that it's (a little) less likely those changes get integrated into master.
-- Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. ,= ,-_-. =. bss@iguanasuicide.net ((_/)o o(\_)) ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy `-'(. .)`-' http://iguanasuicide.net/ \_/