Algo Forge and MetaEditor Git errors, bugs and questions : CURRENTLY UNRELIABLE.
I confirm the issue. Finally lost 2 days of work, not only 1.
Doing a PULL is just OVERWRITING all changes made locally, instead of merging.
So instead of having a software that helps to avoid and manage human errors, you have just the reverse. If you forgot to pull BEFORE doing any change you are dead.
I confirm the issue. Finally lost 2 days of work, not only 1.
Doing a PULL is just OVERWRITING all changes made locally, instead of merging.
So instead of having a software that helps to avoid and manage human errors, you have just the reverse. If you forgot to pull BEFORE doing any change you are dead.
Thanks for this.
Just got forced into installing the update. Have you ran across this error when adding files/folders to Git?
MQL5: update index for add failed with -1 error, generic error
Thanks in advance for your feedback
Thanks for this.
Just got forced into installing the update. Have you ran across this error when adding files/folders to Git?
Thanks in advance for your feedback
No idea sorry.
I don't use the system any more, too much trouble. I decided to use Git but as an external tool, not the MetaEditor integrated version.
For the ones having bad experience with MetaEditor integrated Git, I want to share my experience.
I am now using GitHub Desktop, with a GitHub remote repository of course, the GHD GUI give you access to most of the common feature of Git. In case you need some advanced features, you can open a Git Bash session and work with manual commands.
For it to work, if you come from using ME integrated Git :
- Remove your community login/password from ME Options.
- Close ME.
- Remove the .Git folder from your local repository.
- In GitHub Desktop (or any other Git GUI, or command line), add a local repository pointing to your local code folder.
- Restart ME.
That's it. Of course you will have to configure your remote repository.
It works flawlessly, it's a total relief to deal a reliable, stable and professional tools like Git/GitHub.
The only (small) drawback is you will lose the integration with ME of course. It's really a minor issue if you have some knowledge of Git.
Thanks Alain for sharing your experience. The solution you propose using GitHub Desktop is really helpful and practical, especially for those of us who have felt frustrated with MetaEditor's integrated Git. Being able to work with local commits, proper branches, and real merges is a huge relief.
That said, I also think it's fair to acknowledge that this Git integration in MetaEditor is still relatively new. I trust MetaQuotes will continue to improve it over time, because the idea is excellent, it just needs a more mature implementation.
In the meantime, using external tools like GitHub Desktop is clearly the most reliable option.
Thanks again for sharing!
Many times, I have to wonder why MetaQuotes always wants to "reinvent the wheel"!
They could have simply added generalised Git functionality to MetaEditor, and allowed users to select which ever Git service to use, just like in VSCode (Visual Studio Code), which has had built-in support for Git for quite some time, allowing it to work with GitHub, BitBucket, or any other Git service or even private Git servers.
And obviously, they could still go ahead and offer the AlgoForge Git service too with whichever specialised functionality they want to offer the MQL5 community.
So, why do they always complicate things to the point that it becomes restrictive and crippled?
That said, I also think it's fair to acknowledge that this Git integration in MetaEditor is still relatively new. I trust MetaQuotes will continue to improve it over time, because the idea is excellent, it just needs a more mature implementation.
I don't have time to play the beta tester for MetaQuotes. I lost a lot more than 2 days of work, so I decided to stop wasting my time.
If they fix the Git integration, then good, but I will not use it anymore. I need tools that works, simple as that, and I seriously doubt they will ever fix all the bugs. After so many years the old SVN system was still full of bugs, only usable if you were working alone (once you learnt how to deal with the bugs). To work in team the old SVN was just unusable, anyone who really tried it, knew it.
They replaced it with the ultimate CVS, great, but they decapitated the Git system making the most important features unreachable from ME. That's even without talking about the bugs.
It doesn't make sense at all.
But I am grateful, they pushed me to find a solution and to switch definitely to Git, at least one problem solved.
Remain all the other weaknesses of ME, unfortunately.
Many times, I have to wonder why MetaQuotes always wants to "reinvent the wheel"!
They could have simply added generalised Git functionality to MetaEditor, and allowed users to select which ever Git service to use, just like in VSCode (Visual Studio Code), which has had built-in support for Git for quite some time, allowing it to work with GitHub, BitBucket, or any other Git service or even private Git servers.
And obviously, they could still go ahead and offer the AlgoForge Git service too with whichever specialised functionality they want to offer the MQL5 community.
So, why do they always complicate things to the point that it becomes restrictive and crippled?
I fully agree. Though we will never know or understand such decision, we just have to deal with it.
I am stuck with MetaEditor as I am using the debugger intensively, at least that's an amazing feature which works very well.
We now have a dark mode (wow 😂), but we still don't have a working IntelliSense, we don't have a styler that make sense, we don't have macro (editor macro), we don't have a code navigation system, etc...
In addition to GitHub Desktop, I've also used, and would recommend, tools like:
- SourceTree (great if you use Bitbucket).
- GitKraken (very visual and team-friendly).
- Git via terminal together with Visual Studio Code, which has native Git integration.
- Private repositories on GitHub or GitLab, depending on the project.
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
Be cautious using Git (from MetaEditor), I just lost 1 day of work.
Of course I should have commit my work more often, but still I would probably have lost some work due to this issue. I didn't commit more often as I don't want to send work in progress to the server and MetaQuotes implementation of Git doesn't allow to commit locally, only to the server.
So what happened, we work in team. We have a main codebase with a commit done 2 days ago. While I was working on a big update, my partner did small changes in 2 files. To get these 2 changes on my current work I did a "Pull"...
2025.06.19 08:41:45.409 Git 13 / 13 objects received, 5 local, 13 indexed, 3319 bytes
2025.06.19 08:41:45.430 Git fetch refs/remotes/origin/main
2025.06.19 08:41:45.798 Git [file1].mqh modified
2025.06.19 08:41:45.798 Git [file2].mqh modified
2025.06.19 08:41:46.989 Git fast-forward: merge successfull
Though it modified, silently other files I had changed locally. Fortunately I still had 6 files open in MetaEditor, so for these files, I received a message box asking me if I want to accept the 'external' modification and loose my changes, of course I said no. For the other files, I had not a change to do anything...1 day of work lost. Git log said '13 objects', so possibly I have lost changes on 7 files, not sure about that, I didn't count the files I had changed beforehand.
No idea, how files that are already monitored by Git can just be overwritten locally like that, but it's what happened.
I know, I should use branch for such big update, but from my first tests I am not convinced yet it works as expected, so I delayed using this feature.