In Azure DevOps, there are separate pipelines for Build and Releases. Single build (build artifacts) can be released to multiple environment with different triggers.
E.g. when build is comoleted, it triggers release to Test env. When it is approved, release to another env with different parameters is triggered.
What's the GitHubs way of deploying single build artifacts to multiple environments?
There currently is no direct equivalent.
It can be modeled using multiple github actions or multiple dependent jobs in the same action. But it's not the same thing.
Some folks have been very creative with the build action creating an Issue and waiting for a LGTM comment from specific other people to trigger a new action. You can use releases or packages to store the build output.
I guessing something will come in the future, but for now, if you want environments, stages, approvals etc. Then keep using Azure Pipelines with GitHub.
Related
We have a creat-react-app application, which includes a couple of variables that are different (react) build time, depending on where the build will be deployed. For example, we need to specify build time which URL will be used, e.g. https://app-stage.company.com for a release-x.y.z build vs. https://app.company.com for a master build (please refer to this article about GitFlow). We've already created such a build pipeline as suggested here, which will build with the appropriate react config for any commit to branches master, release-x.y.z, dev, hotfix-x.y.z.
We would like to create a release pipeline now, that reflects the GitFlow process and makes use of the automated builds.
The release pipeline should deploy to a dev site for a dev build, to a stage site for a release-x.y.z build, etc. I know I can inspect the source branch from a build and filter/modify config/variables based on it. Fine, so I can create a release pipeline with a single stage, whose config is modified on the fly based on which source branch was built.
But I understand that release pipelines "should" have a series of stages, i.e. dev -> stage -> production, probably with approvals inbetween. I can't see how this could be achieved in this scenario.
Suggestions?
Our idea as of now is to just have that single modified-on-the-fly stage in the release pipe and handle the stages from git merges/pull requests, according to GitFlow.
At the moment, we are generating Jenkins jobs using the Job DSL plugin. Typically, we have the following jobs per project:
CI build (SNAPSHOT build)
Deployment, one per stage
Integration test (nightly build)
Creation of a release
Reports (Maven site, during the night)
Am I right that there can be only one Jenkins file in the project's repository? How could I map our requirements to the new Jenkins pipeline?
I'm asking because we're going to install version 2 of Jenkins, and I'm not sure whether we should abandon our Jenkins job generation and use Jenkins files.
There are a couple of options, which might help you to migrate over to Jenkins pipelines. But you don't have to, especially not all at once.
You can use a shared library to define functions that can be used in multiple jobs, e.g. a buildOurThing function.
You can trigger an existing job (of whatever kind) using the build step. So you could model your new pipeline around existing jobs.
You can still use parameterized builds, if you want to use the deployment job with different targets.
Jenkins pipeline is really worth using, but maybe don't force you to an immediate switch. If JobDSL works for you, keep it. If you have new jobs (pipelines) to create, get familiar with pipelines.
I'm looking for advice on the best approach to setup TeamCity/Octopus.
Currently I have multiple branches in TFS2015 - dev, main and release (currently we create a release branch for each release).
Our procedure is to develop in dev and deploy to dev environment. When we are ready for testing we merge from dev to main and deploy to test from main. When happy we create a release branch and deploy to live from the release branch. This is a manual process.
Hotfixes are done on the release branch and deployed to live. We then merge back to main/dev.
I'm totally new to this and so far in a VM playground I've setup TFS2015, TeamCity and Octopus and can check-in to TFS, build/create package on TeamCity and deploy this pack from Octopus. But...
I'm unsure how I should setup TeamCity and Octopus to work with multiple branches? Multiple projects for each branch and generate different artifacts?
When I do this for real I have a TFS VM, I plan on installing TeamCity and Octopus on this along with the build agent. Is this a bad idea? Should I create a new VM just for TM and Octopus?
Any advice or best practice would be appreciated.
Although your question is good in scope, but a good answer must cover many details to be complete.
Let me try to point out the main areas that you will need to further investigate and configure.
TeamCity
A VCS root can be configured to listen to multiple branches via a branch specification
A VCS root can contain multiple projects/solutions and these can be built in multiple steps within TeamCity.
Given that Team City does not support conditional build steps, you will need a different strategy to allow you to vary build steps (and parameters) per release channels / environments.
My recommend approach is to split up the builds into a build definition per release channel (target environment).
Dev and Feature branches could share a single build definition.
Master and Hotfix branches can share a single build definition since they both publish to staging/production environments.
Release branches will need a separate build definition and publish to QA/Testing environment.
This gives you fine grained control over parameter and configurations of each release channel. build a debug version of your app from Dev branch for example at major version 3, while build a release version from Master branch with major version 2.
Every build definition will have a step to publish its artefacts/packages to Octopus Deploy, and specify the channel of which the artifacts belong to.
Octopus Deploy
In Octopus Deploy, define the channels to reflect the release channels, that also reflect your branching model.
Develop, Test, Release are my standard goto channels
Each channel can enforce a different Lifecycle to limit the environments that a channel can deploy to and how an application progresses through your overall ALM cycle.
I know this is not a complete answer. but it is a good start that I hope can help you refine your question to more specific technical details.
We're having somewhat similar CI setup requirements except TFS. In our case workflow for most projects is: GitHub -> TeamCity -> Octopus Deploy.
So I'm not sure about multi-branch setup with TFS, but in case with GitHub repos it's pretty easy to configure in TeamCity. You just have to specify branch-related settings in your VCS root (see Branch configuration). When you have configured that, TeamCity will let you run build's for every specified branch separately and will display build statuses for every branch nicely.
In Octopus we use Channels feature to split workflows of releases coming from different branches. That means we have channel-per-branch convention for the projects, so that TeamCity is pushing packaged releases from particular branch (in our case it's develop and master) into it's respective channel in Octopus (see Channels in Octopus).
Probably you can setup all the services on single machine but imho it's not the best practice to do performance-wise and scalability-wise.
Off course I don't know you code etc but I think you should step away from merging from dev to test and then creating a version from test. That way you essentially are building a different application compared to the one you were having on dev. Once you merge from test to production and build your application from there, you are releasing a build you haven't been testing.
You should strive for a flow in which you build once and deploy multiple times. So, build one package which you promote from dev to test to production.
Off course you can have a production branch on which you could fix bugs etc. The Channels feature in Octopus works great for scenario's like that.
So answering my own question (sorry), the approach I ended up taking was to simplify my branches and configure TeamCity/Octopus like so...
Branching Strategy
I've moved from
--dev
--main
--release
----release1
----release2
to
--master
--release
----release1
----release2
Master is where most of the devs do their work, when we are ready for a release we have a cut-off point and merge master into a new release branch.
The release branch is deployed to test and any fixes from testing are made on the release branch.
When testing is complete we deploy to live/production from this branch.
This means that the binaries we have tested are exactly the same as the ones we deploy to live/production.
Teamcity
In TeamCity master is automatically built each time a check-in occurs. Then the package is pushed to Octopus. Octopus acts as a repository in this case. TeamCity also creates the release on Octopus. So it should be checkin->build->create release->deploy.
To do this, I have one VCS Root and have a build configuration called Build-Master. This uses the checkout rules to ensure I'm only using the master branch. I use the Ocotpus packaging to build the package then use the OctopusDeploy runner in TeamCity to create a release automatically and deploy to the dev servers.
Release is different. I want to deploy to the test servers manually rather than each time a check-in occurs. When happy promote this to the live production servers.
Any fixes from test will be made to the release branch and deployed to test.
When testing is complete we promote to live and any hotfixes are made on the release branch. Obviously all fixes/hotfixes are merged down to master.
So, in TeamCity to achieve this I have a build configuration called Build-Release. Again, I use the checkout rules to ensure I'm dealing with the correct release branch.
The build creates a package using OctoPack, however this time it's not pushed to Octopus.
Octopus
Octopus has a project specifically for deploying master to our dev servers, for example projectnamehere-dev.
In Octopus, I have a separate project for Test/Prod. I've setup an external feed which points at TeamCity so I can pickup the package created in TeamCity. This is setup in Library->External Feeds.
So, to deploy to test. I create the release branch in TFS and give it a version number, 1,2,3 etc. I then change the Build-Release build config to point at this new branch. Change the version number.
Then in Octopus, I create a release, select this package and deploy to test. Any fixes from testing are made on this release branch. I just build the package again and create a new release and choose the new package.
When testing is complete, in Octopus I just promote the last release to the live production servers.
Channels in Octopus are used on the two projects because they have different life cycles. I also created two new life cycles, the default is dev/test/prod. I created just a dev and then test/prod.
Hope this helps.
In the version control settings -> vcs -> Branch Specifications: "*" ("This will do all branch, filter as needs be" e.g. +:refs/heads/master +:refs/heads/develop)
enter image description here
Octopus doesn't handle branches, it only deploys, you can however use their rest api, so for example, if test pass in develop then call the octopus rest api to create a new release and deploy.
The best part of UrbanCode Deploy is it models a component based architecture application, and its deployment environment so well that everybody can understand in 10 minutes. Very initiative, flexible and powerful. Don't know if there is another tool does this well.
Jenkins Pipeline can orchestra the Continuously Delivery workflow at the higher level to include the build, test, etc.
Does it make sense?
There's a new UCD plugin for Jenkins that adds nice integrations with the Jenkins 2.0 pipeline. I'm going to poke the developers since there doesn't seem to be a nice video showing it, but there is documentation (and a link to the plugin) out here:
https://developer.ibm.com/urbancode/docs/jenkins-build-step-integration-with-ibm-urbancode-deploy/
I think the idea is that you can use Jenkins pipeline to govern the flow of a build through early test environments, while UCD owns the late test environments / production when the pipeline operates more at the snapshot level. Would love your feedback!
Today, in my production environment, i use Jenkins to manage my build (like a "build pipeline" with some tests) and put all my build results into Urbancode Code station. Urbancode is doing all my deploy work perfectly, the integration with Jenkins is beautiful, easy and fast. I have read some articles about Jenkins delivery pipeline and do not recommend use it.
Check it out
https://www.thoughtworks.com/radar/tools
We have a distributed system with many services which talk to each other.
Sometimes a code change in one service will require a feature to have been deployed in another service.
We use octopus to deploy all the things which is cool but we really want to prevent services from being deployed before the things they depend on are deployed.
Is there a way we can do this with octopus deploy?
For example can I make the nuget package for one service depend on an explicit version range of another package?
If you don't want to deploy all your projects as one massive deployment with a series of steps that push your different services to different machines, then I don't think there's a built-in way to make your deployments dependent on each other's version numbers like that. (see this uservoice suggestion in Octopus asking for that very feature)
However, I do think that you could write a powershell script that ran as a pre-deployment step and checked the version number of one nuget package against a version range stored in another. Then the ps script could halt or allow deployment accordingly.