Git workflow for lone developer (total git newbie)

Question

I have decided that it's time for me to start using Git on a PHP project that I have been developing casually for over a decade. (Please, no lectures from the version control police!) Due to the complex setup required on my VPS to do everything the project needs (esp. single-codebase-multiple-client structure and a Japanese-capable installation of TeX to create specialty PDFs), it is not possible to set up a development environment on my local Windows box. But I do have a testbed area on the server that I can play in, so it's my development area. Currently I use Filezilla to access the server and open files directly into Notepad++, and when I'm ready to see my edit in action, I just save and let Filezilla upload. When everything looks good on the testbed, I copy the files to the production codebase area. Yeah, that gives me no history of my changes other than my own comments, and I have to be careful not to mix bug fixes with half-finished new features. I can see the value of Git's branches for different upgrades in progress.

Yesterday I got my toes wet. First I created a Github account, and then (at the recommendation of a tutorial) installed Git For Windows (with its own Bash and tiny-looking GUI) and Kdiff3, and followed some instructions for configuring Git Bash. After all that, though, I ended up having to install something else in order to interface with my Github account (appropriately named Github for Windows), which seem to do all the stuff the other two programs were supposed to do for me. Anyway, then I did a simple task as my first foray into the Github world - I had added functionality to someone else's jQuery plugin and wanted to share it with the developer, so I forked his repo, cloned it to my machine, overwrote the file I had previously edited and tested, synced to my Github account, and sent a pull request. All the terminology in that last sentence was brand new to me, so I was pretty proud of myself that I got that far. ;) But I guess I only needed the Github software, not the Git software - it's hard to know what tutorials to believe.

Anyway, now I want to figure out a workflow for my own stuff, which is my actual question for you guys. From what I can tell, having the master repo anywhere but the public Github costs money, and I don't care if others see my code (I don't expect anyone else to work on my oddball project made of spaghetti code, but if they want to, that's great). Okay, but then what? Perhaps one of these scenarios, or something else:

1. Clone branches of the repo to my PC, do edits on the local files, and upload them in Filezilla for testing (a couple more clicks than my current workflow because Filezilla doesn't automatically see the relationship between the local file and the remote file, but not a big deal). Then when I'm happy with the code, commit locally, sync to Github, and copy the files (from somewhere - not sure on this point) to the production area.

2. Install the Linux flavor of Git on my VPS so that the "local" Git file location is the testbed, and use Git through PuTTY to do the local commits. Simpler for file structure (no need for a copy on my PC at all) but more cumbersome to use Git:

   • I'm not on PuTTY very frequently, and for some reason the connection often dies on me and I have to restart.
   • Even though the Linux command line is Git's native habitat, I am probably more comfortable with a GUI (because I forget command syntax quickly - old brain, I guess).

   Also, since I never ended up using the Git program I installed here, I'm not sure whether it would be Git or Github I would be using on the server.

3. Some other scenario, since neither #1 or #2 uses Git/Github to manage the production file area at all, which would probably be a good idea so that I don't forget to copy everything I need.

I tried to research the possibility of a PHP-based GUI to go with idea #2 (so I don't have to use PuTTY for day-to-day operations), but it seems that the discussions of such tools all assume either that you are trying to create your own Github service, or that the "local" cloned repo is physically on your local PC (with xAMP running on whatever OS it is). But maybe the Github software I used is enough to do all that - it's hard to tell. I don't yet understand the interplay between a master public repo on Github, branches somewhere (on Github also?), at least two sets of files on my web server (the testbed and the production area), Github software, Git software, and the keyboard/screen of the computer I'm sitting at.

So pardon my newbie ramblings, but if someone out there has a similar development situation, What's your workflow? Or what would you suggest for me?

Answer 1

Here's one way to aproach the issue:

You will need three repositories:

• a local repo to edit code. [1]
• a bare remote repository on your server. This will be in a location that in not publicly viewable, but you can ssh in to. [2]
• The production environment. [3]

Here's the implementation:

workstation$ cd localWorkingDirectory/
workstation$ git init
workstation$ git add .
workstation$ git commit -m 'initial commit'
workstation$ ssh login@myserver
myserver$ mkdir myrepo.git
myserver$ cd myrepo.git
myserver$ git init --bare
myserver$ exit
workstation$ cd localWorkingDirectory/
workstation$ git remote add origin login@myserver:myrepo.git
workstation$ git push origin master

every time you make a commit on any branch, back it up with:

workstation$ git push origin BRANCH

When you are ready to move branch version2 into production: do this

workstation$ git push origin version2
workstation$ ssh login@myserver
myserver$ git clone path/to/myrepo.git productionDirectory
myserver$ cd productionDirectory
myserver$ git checkout version2

Oh no! It dsoesn't work! better switch back to version1!

workstation$ ssh login@myserver
myserver$ cd productionDirectory
myserver$ git checkout version1

Answer 2

You don't need github (or any other central store) to start using git. Especially since you're a lone developer. Git runs directly on your own machine, without any server component (unlike for example subversion). Just git init and start committing away.

I agree with the other commenters here, that you should aim to get a local development environment up and running. Even if it takes some effort, it's certainly worth it. One of the side effects of doing so may be that you are forced to decouple some of your current hard dependencies and thereby getting a better overall application architecture out of it. The things that can't easily be replicated in your development environment could instead be replaced with mock services.

Once that is in place, look into a scripted deployment process. E.g. write a shell script that syncs your development machine's codebase with the production server. There are many ways to do this, but I suggest you start really simple, then revise your options (Capistrano is one option).

Answer 3

I'd certainly look at something like capistrano for your current development setup.

I can understand why you might have a reticence to use the terminal but it would probably help your understanding of git in context. Doesn't take long to get to grips with the commands and when tied into a system such as capistrano you'll be rocking development code up to your environment in no time:

git commit -a 
git push origin develop
cap deploy:dev

When i'm working on windows i generally try to replicate the deployment environment i have with virtual machines locally using something like sun's virtualbox. That way you can minimise potential environment issues while still developing locally. Then you can just use putty to ssh to your local vm. Setup sharing between the vm and your host OS and all your standard IDEs/editors will work too. I find this preferable to having to setup a vps remotely but whatever works.