Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Updater Integration Using Bitbucket Bitbucket has removed the ability to use custom domain names. You can instead use the instructions at the bottom of this post to create a repository named [yourname].bitbucket.org. Problem: You want to allow your plugin to automatically update using Updater, but you don't have a website where you can host your plugin. Solution: Use Bitbucket! Here's how. It looks overwhelming, but you only need to do this once. If you already know how to use Bitbucket and Mercurial, then skip to step 5.
If you commit changes from another computer, you will need to update. To do this, right-click on your repository's folder and choose TortoiseHg > Synchronize. Then click the pull button (it's the second button from the left at the top). Once the console says that the command was completed, you can close the window. Some Tips:
Update: Instead of registering a custom domain, you can create a repository named [yourbitbucketusername].bitbucket.org, and all of its contents will be available on the Web at [yourusername].bitbucket.org. For instance, I could create a repository called Doctor_McKay.bitbucket.org with scripting and plugins folders and put all of my plugins there. Then my Updater URL would look like http://doctor_mckay.bitbucket.org/awesomeplugin.txt, with the plugin source and binaries being located at http://doctor_mckay.bitbucket.org/plugins/awesomeplugin.smx and http://doctor_mckay.bitbucket.org/scripting/awesomeplugin.sp. |
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Nice tutorial! Having a reliable website was the one thing keeping me from supporting Updater (that and the fact that Updater overwrites custom edits, but a convar can manage that.) Tutorial was easy to follow.
|
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Nice writeup! :up:
Quote:
|
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Thanks for the tutorial; that might come handy.
|
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Just an thing which came to my mind while readind this and looking at your repo.
If you use this technique your masterbranch should always be deployable/stable. In other words, the version you have in your updaterfile should always be equal to the one in master/default. An workflow similar to this is important in this case.
Other than that this is a nice post, i would recommend dropbox for the "usual" developer though. Yours sincerely Impact |
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
|
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
|
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Quote:
But I'm really a Git-addict, using it in my company and for every private project, so don't even try to convince me to switch to something else :) Git just feels lightweight and fast for me (I also already used Mercurial a lot of times). But I really don't want to start a discussion about that, I'm really sure every versioning system has its benefits and everyone should just use what they like. I don't mind using Mercurial when I have to, but I prefer Git for my own projects. Please don't try to force people to use something. |
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
I thought I'd ask here because I'm considering doing the same: Is it better to have a separate repository just for Updater releases, or to have named branches on the main one?
For example, code is always pushed to default, but Updater releases could be pushed to a "stable-release" branch, then maybe have a "dev-release" as well. Is it down to personal preference or would one be more recommended than the other? |
Re: Updater Integration Using Bitbucket
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 23:38. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.