![]() 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).
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |