Versioning MuLab files - your experiences?
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 409 posts since 26 Jul, 2010 from Germany
I would like to initiate a short discussion about your experiences of versioning your MuLab work files (sessions, patches etc.).
I started with just MuLab's session backup file (and of course occasional backups to other storage media). Later I manually copied sessions with timestamp to a subfolder. I recently switched to the tool "AutoVer", which automates this copying everytime I save a session or other (configurable) files.
EDIT: You'll find AutoVer at http://beanland.net.au/autover/
But there may be other solutions. What's your experience? Let us know.
JR
I started with just MuLab's session backup file (and of course occasional backups to other storage media). Later I manually copied sessions with timestamp to a subfolder. I recently switched to the tool "AutoVer", which automates this copying everytime I save a session or other (configurable) files.
EDIT: You'll find AutoVer at http://beanland.net.au/autover/
But there may be other solutions. What's your experience? Let us know.
JR
-
- KVRAF
- 2938 posts since 18 Jul, 2005
Wow, I'm glad you posted that, it looks really useful. I've also just been copying folders and files to now, but had recently started to consider using Git.
Autover looks like a much better fit for the purpose though!
Autover looks like a much better fit for the purpose though!
- KVRist
- Topic Starter
- 409 posts since 26 Jul, 2010 from Germany
Yes, AutoVer works fine in the background (Windows only). The only thing I miss is the ability to assign comments to a file version. But there is a "to do list" with this feature.
You were just considerung about Git, or did you try it? Any experiences?
I was considering about subversion, but I think, it's too big for this purpose.
JR
You were just considerung about Git, or did you try it? Any experiences?
I was considering about subversion, but I think, it's too big for this purpose.
JR
-
- KVRAF
- 2938 posts since 18 Jul, 2005
I use Git all the time at work, but I didn't actually end up trying it for music stuff. Still, I think Git would be fairly decent for that use - it's lightweight, the compression is good and branching is really fast (useful if you want to non-destructively pursue big variations in a project).
But it wouldn't have the automatic creation of versions without writing a monitoring application that would make the commits for you in the background. Which I'm too lazy to do, so AutoVer it is!
But it wouldn't have the automatic creation of versions without writing a monitoring application that would make the commits for you in the background. Which I'm too lazy to do, so AutoVer it is!