What we use:
We use mercurial and bitbucket for repositories. Appveyor and kudu for continous integration and deployment. We are using visual studio 2015 as IDE.
What we have:
We have different web projects. They share some other projects. All of web projects have their own solution. Every solution have their own repository.
If there is change on develop branch. Appveyor builds this repository, tests and deploys it.
If there is change on default, kudu builds this repository and deploys it.
What we want:
We want to merge all of these projects in one solution. But I couldn't figure it out, how I can achive continous integration or deployment.
If I change something on webproject1, I just want to build and deploy webproject1. The other webprojects in solution neither should be built nor deployed.
Perhaps a single repository will help you. Using relative path to include the shared libraries from your different applications.
Each application can still have its own Solution file and your CI setup also stays as it is. What changes is that the shared projects you have across all applications will be referenced with relative path. E.g.:
Repository root\Core\Component1\Component1.csproj
Repository root\Core\Component2\Component2.csproj
Repository root\Applications\App1\App1.sln
Repository root\Applications\App1\Domain\Domain.csproj
Repository root\Applications\App1\Web\Web.csproj
Repository root\Applications\App2\App2.sln
Repository root\Applications\App2\Domain\Domain.csproj
Repository root\Applications\App2\Web\Web.csproj
Now your different application can include the Core\Components they need by adding existing project to solution using relative path.
Your continuous integration system will have VCS triggers watching the app and dependencies so only relevant changes fire a build.
So if App1 developer makes a change on Component1, and Component1 is also used by App2, the build server will trigger a build to App1 and App2, signaling any breaking changes. However if App2 doesn't not depend on Component1, then only App1 will build.
This is achieved by configuring the build triggers for your applications.
One benefit of this strategy vs having a single .sln is that you won't have to build everything each time you build solution (nor configure what projects to build each time you work on a different app)
Also note that you can achieve this with multiple repositories. But that means you'd need to check them out at the correct location so your relative paths work. It's also quite obscure since if you checkout App1 and try to build it. It simply won't work and you'll have to figure out which other repos to check out, etc.
You are using Mercurial but FYI, the way (one of) this would be handled with Git is with submodules.
Related
I have Jenkins version 2.7.1 running on a Windows 7 machine. It is successfully pulling code from a subversion repository and running tests. I have the test jobs set up for the development branch of each project only.
We periodically make stable releases of the projects in jar files with version numbers. I would like to have Jenkins be the repository manager for those stable releases. These are made by hand - There is no Jenkins job making or testing stable releases. The projects do use Maven.
Each stable build is tagged in the subversion repository, so it could be made again on demand if needed.
I downloaded the Maven repository server hoping to make this fit the purpose. I read the documentation that's provided, but it's pretty terse. As I understand it and have it configured now, this appears to have a couple of issues:
If I go to jenkins-ip/plugin/repository/project, it has made directories there that expose the names of all of my projects, which seems undesirable. (Here jenkins-ip is the IP where I access Jenkins on my local network.)
On the other hand, there's nothing but empty directories under these projects, so they're currently useless.
These projects all correspond to the continuous testing of the development branch. There's no apparent way to get the stable builds into the hierarchy. (It doesn't seem efficient to create a job for each stable release...)
Is there anyway to get Jenkins (with this plugin or through another method) to be the repository manager just for the stable builds? I know that I can start a different repository manager like archiva, but it would be ideal to use Jenkins since it's already running and it seems to claim capability for this function now.
To use Maven repository server you have to build the project on Jenkins.
Then the plugin will expose all archived artifacts as maven repo.
Note you need to use a "Maven project" type for it to work (freestyle is not supported)
There are several plugins that will help you manage building from multiple tags, however not all of them work with "Maven project" type.
You could also try Jenkins pipeline (previously "Workflow") or the Job-DSL plugin.
A simplest solution would be to have a build parameter specify the tag name (then checkout e.g. ^/tags/projectname/${tagParam}), but you have to figure out how to trigger the job then.
Our company currently uses TFS for source control and build server. Most of our projects are written in C/C++, but we also have some .NET projects and wouldn't want to be limited if we need to use other languages in the future.
We'd like to use Git for our source control and we're trying to understand what would be the best choice for a build server. We have started looking into TeamCity, but there are some issues we're having trouble with which will probably be relevant regardless of our choice of build server:
Build dependencies - We'd like to be able to control the build dependencies for each <project, branch>. For example, have <MyProj, feature_branch> depend on <InfraProj1, feature_branch> and <InfraProj2, master>.
From what we’ve seen, to do that we might need to use Gradle or something similar to build our projects instead of plain MSBuild. Is this correct? Are there simpler ways of achieving this?
Local builds - Obviously we'd like to be able to build projects locally as well. This becomes somewhat of a problem when project dependencies are introduced, as we need a way to reference these resources or copy them locally for the build to succeed. How is this usually solved?
I'd appreciate any input, but a sample setup which covers these issues will also be a great help.
IMHO both issues you mention fall really in the config management category, thus, as you say, unrelated to the build server choice.
A workspace for a project build (doesn't matter if centralized or local) should really contain all necessary resources for the build.
How can you achieve that? Have a project "metadata" git repo with a "content" file containing all your project components and their dependencies (each with its own git/other repo) and their exact versions - effectively tying them together coherently (you may find it useful to store other metadata in this component down the road as well, like component specific SCM info if using a mix of SCMs across the workspace).
A workspace pull wrapper script would first pull this metadata git repo, parse the content file and then pull all the other project components and their dependencies according with the content file info. Any build in such workspace would have all the parts it needs.
When time comes to modify either the code in a project component or the version of one of the dependencies you'll need to also update this content file in the metadata git repo to reflect the update and commit it - this is how your project makes progress coherently, as a whole.
Of course, actually managing dependencies is another matter. Tons of opinions out there, some even conflicting.
We currently use SilkCentral Test Manager (SCTM) integrated with our source control system via SCTM source control profiles. However, we would like to explore integrating with build artifacts checked into Maven's remote Nexus repository instead.
The idea being that the application-under-test is built and checked into Nexus along with the automated tests only if the build and the tests pass. Therefore, when QA is ready to run tests from SCTM (manual or automated), there is a well-defined combination of application build artifacts and test build artifacts in Nexus that present a more reliable target for SCTM as compared to getting the latest code from the source control system.
All of this is more relevant during active development when the code and the tests and changing daily and the builds are snapshot builds rather than formal builds with tags in the source control system that SCTM could use.
SCTM apparently has support for both universal naming convention (UNC) and Apache virtual file system (VFS) and either of these should potentially be utilizable to point the SCTM source control profiles to Nexus artifacts rather than raw source code. However, I wanted to check with the community to see if there's a simpler approach. (For example, I noted the existence of a Hudson SCTM plugin.) Also, I welcome alternative thoughts and ideas.
There are probably many solutions for solving this, I'd try the following:
Manage the build/first test/publishing steps in Hudson/Jenkins.
For example by modelling it with dependent jobs, the publish job is only triggered if the tests pass. There are also more advanced gatekeeper plugins available (for example a Downstream Ext plugin) which might solve this even more comfortable.
Once the publishing is done, use the Hudson/Jenkins-Silk Central plugin to trigger the executions on Silk Central. There, instead of using UNC or VFS, I'd rather use a setup script which pulls the artifacts from the repository and prepares everything for the tests. This would allow you to use something Maven/Nexus aware to pull the correct artifacts from the repository, instead of somehow trying to make it accessible via UNC or VFS.
We have several projects undergoing, and there are dependencies relationships among them. All projects makes up a final software.
We set up a DEV build environment to do snapshots build by using LASTEST dependencies. Any change will trigger a snapshot build (jekins job) and all dependent's snapshot build will be triggered too, and so if any changes break some project, that project's own build will notify the owner.
The question is about the release. The DEV build is continuous, and we want to release EVERY project against certain timestamp when it was a GREEN dev build across all projects.
How to get such release process setup?
thanks.
jenkins provides some Post-Build-Actions. You can use them to publish/archive every successfully built artifact to whereever you want.
Your Release-Job can take all the artifacts and deploy them. So you're sure all artifacts are from GREEN builds and is also independent from all the continuous jobs.
If you want to be really cool, do some smoke tests (e.g. is database connection working, external APIs working, etc) in the Release-Job as well.
best,
marco
We have a lot of different solutions/projects which are managed by different teams. Our solution needs to reference several projects that another team owns. We don't want to add these dependencies as project references because we do not intend on modifying that code, we just want to use it. Also we already have quite a bit of projects in our solution and don't want to add a bunch more since it will slow down Visual Studio. So we are building these projects in a separate solution and adding them as file references to our solution.
My question is, how do people manage these types of dependencies? Should I just have some automated process what looks for changes to those projects, builds them and checks the dlls into our source control, after which we treat them like other 3rd party dependencies? Is there a recommended way of doing this?
One solution, although it may not necessarily be what you are looking for, is to have each dependent sub-system perform a release. This release could be in the form of a MSI install, or just a network share of assemblies. When a significant change is made, that team could let you know, and you could run the install or a script to copy the files.
Once you got the release, you could put them into the GAC, that way you would not have to worry about copying them to your project bin folders.
Another solution, assuming you are using a build server or continuous integration of some kind, is to have a post build step or process stage the files. Than at any given moment, the developers of the other teams could grab the new files , or have a script or bat file pull them down locally.
EDIT - ANOTHER SOLUTION
It might be best to ask why do you have these dependencies? Do you really need them locally when building your part of the application? Could you mock out the dependencies in your solution, allowing you to code, build, and run unit tests? The the actual application would wire these up in your DEV/Test/Prod environments. Keeping your solution decoupled and dependent free may be a better solution for the individual team. Leave the integration and coupling when the application runs in a real setting.
(Not a complete answer, but still:)
Any delivery is better stored in a file/binary repository, as opposed to a VCS used to manage sources history.
We prefer managing those deliveries in a repo like Nexus, and we are using maven to get back the right dependencies.
Even if those tools can be more Java-oriented, Nexus can store anything, and maven is only there to read the pom.xml of each artifact and compute the right dependencies.