I am using VS.net and TFS. In the past I have stored my technical documentation (explanatory documents etc) in TFS document WSS repository and linked it to my source code via the Story, Task or other work item. This has proved unsatisfactory in the long term because the documentation is not strongly linked to the code it describes.
What options do I have to link documentation to code in VS.net/TFS other than through the work item. I can think of two options immediately -
1) Add it as Content to the project or solution itself and store it in the source code control repository
2) Add it as a URL in the code header, and store it in the TFS WSS document store.
Both these seem unsatisfactory - (1) means the documentation is not available outside the SCCS, and (2) means the programmer has to hunt through code to find the documentation link (which could be anywhere in any header).
Are there any other options that are in common use ?
Phillip
I don't know if there is a single golden answer to your question. But let me share how I do it.
Personally I split my documentation in technical and business documentation.
Technical documentation only consists of four documents:
What are we building, short document that you can give to a new developer to get quickly up to speed what the project is all about.
Instructions to compile. This document describes any steps a developer needs to take on a completely new machine to compile the code and run unit tests
Instructions to deploy. All necessary information to deploy the app to a new environment
Technologies. A list of technologies used in the project with links to more information if a developer needs to learn something.
This documentation is stored in a solution folder as part of the solution in Visual Studio.
Outside stakeholders can view this documentation through the web access of TFS. They can't change it however without having Visual Studio or Team Explorer and knowing how to use those.
For all other documentation we use SharePoint. TFS allows you to link Workitems to documents in SharePoint. We try to avoid any technical documentation in here.
Another option that you might consider is to create a new Work Item type called "document" and to have a hyperlink from here to the document location. Now you can create hard links between code files and changesets as well as PBI's to originating documentation.
In addition, when documents move you only have one place to update it.
Related
What is a good learning resource for TFS and how to use TFS with Visual Studio?
Specifically, I want to know two things.
Exactly what are the step-by-steps procedures of checking in code. I know that I am required to do a code review. So, after the code review is done by a peer, I understand that this is not enough and the original developer has to click to do something to submit the code into the TFS system. I mean, I want to know precisely what buttons to click on.
I also want to know how to use Visual Studio to look up the actual version. How do I determine the details of what is already checked in?
There are many blogs videos in google. If you want a full detail resource, suggest you directly take a look at our official doc here -- Azure DevOps Server Documentation
A suggested learn order for your reference:
Installation (you could skip this if your company already done this)--
Code -- Build&Release -- Packages-- Test-- Work-- Analysis-- Admin
Tool
TFS supports two types of version control: Git and Team Foundation Version Control (TFVC). One centralized and one distributed. As for which version control system should you use, you could take a look at this thread: Choosing the right version control for your project
For your case, you could easy check the history in server side. It's called changeset in TFVC and commit in Git.
For example, when you check in your changes, they are stored on the server as a changeset. Changesets contain the history of each item in version control.
You can view a changeset to see what the exact file changes were, discover the owner's comments, find linked work items, and see if any policy warnings were triggered.
The same as Git, actually you could find the answer for both question 1&2 in Code part. Hope it helps.
It's unclear how the repositories are connected and tied together. Each git repo has a different package of cs files, with their own unique features and design schemas. Rather than a hierarchical design structure, where in my understanding or example:
Abp-base (free git repo), would have core essentials
AbpZero-paid (membership subscription to premium git repo), would add additional features into their design that would encourage others to pay for.
AbpZeroTemplate-demo (download from website, not git), would be a sample utilizing the paid content to push and drive sales to unlock the tool to it's full potential.
I downloaded and even paid for the different tiers, but all of the contents are all over the place. When I tried to combine them so that I could take advantage of a complete product, nothing lined up properly, and I get breakage everywhere.
How am I supposed to change the crucial schema design flaws when half of the .proj links to .dll that expect the class to be structured a certain way?
Example:
User is structured: "Name", "Surname". But i want it to be "Firstname", "Lastname." Some may ask, what's the difference? Just like how "Maiden name" is different from "Last name" or "Family name." Those little nuances are'nt procedural thinking. If you went to a stranger and asked "what's your name?" and they said "Chuck Jones," you would then ask to clarify, "What's your first name?"
Each git repository is running off of a different versioning number, that doesn't match with their counterpart. AbpZero is on a stable release version 5.x, and you go to GitHub for Abp and it's saying version 3.x is stable and green. And one of them is using User<TTenant,TUser> as a class, and the other is using User<TUser>. So not only am I getting mixed signals on how they're supposed to work (because git repos point to each other, and rely on .dll for continuity) but they're also not even sharing the same coding structure.
Can anybody help me merge the old and new together, or tell me the direction on how the design is being built?
Disclaimer: I'm a contributor to ASP.NET Boilerplate
ASP.NET Core is a web framework developed by Microsoft, as you know. There are plenty different applications based on it.
ABP is an application framework on top of ASP.NET Core (and MVC 5.x but it's a different story - I skip). It tries to help real life applications on top of ASP.NET Core. It has many features like advanced authorization, background jobs, javascript proxies, DDD infrastructure and so on.. This is completely free and developed on Github: https://github.com/aspnetboilerplate/aspnetboilerplate Thousands of developers are actively using it to build their applications.
ABP framework does not provide a User Interface itself, but provides the infrastructure. So, you should create an empty ASP.NET Core application, add nuget packages, configure the framework and modules, create a UI layout and some basic pages to start your development. This is also a time consuming work. That's why we have created "STARTUP TEMPLATES". There are two startup template:
(A) A free & open source startup template can be downloaded here: https://aspnetboilerplate.com/Templates (It just gets the code from https://github.com/aspnetboilerplate/module-zero-core-template and renames solution for you). This is a simple startup template (but more powerful then ASP.NET Core's standard template when you make File > New Project).
(B) A PAID startup template, which becomes the product on https://aspnetzero.com/. This template has much much more features on top of the framework. You can see all on its web site. Since it's a paid product, the Github repository is private and only available to paid customers.
You either start with template (A) or template (B). You CAN NOT combine them. I believe it's very obvious. For instance. Microsoft provides different startup templates for ASP.NET Core: One of them is Angular, one of them is Razor Pages, one of them is empty... and so on.. So, you select one of them based on your needs.
Both of (A) and (B) templates work on the ABP framework and adds via nuget packages (it's already combined/integrated).
So, after this explanation, I believe no one would even think how to combine them.
How am i supposed to change the crucial schema design flaws when half of the .proj links to .dll that expect the class to be structured a certain way?
When you use a framework or a pre-build solution, you have significant advantages. However, there is nothing in the World that has only advantages. Every solution/framework/library will come with its own limitations, you like or not.
With that in mind.. Despite of other vendors, we provide the FULL SOURCE CODE! User class or another schema class is not inside a CLOSED/SECRET DLL. They are on nuget packages and are open source as I described before. They are framework code. If you want to change the framework code it's always possible. Just download the ABP framework on Github repository, include into your solution, remove nuget packages and add project references. Then you can freely change the User class. Source code is open & here:
https://github.com/aspnetboilerplate/aspnetboilerplate/blob/dev/src/Abp.ZeroCore/Authorization/Users/AbpUser.cs
https://github.com/aspnetboilerplate/aspnetboilerplate/blob/dev/src/Abp.Zero.Common/Authorization/Users/AbpUserBase.cs
Each git repository is running off of a different versioning number
Why we follow the same version numbers for different products those are released and developed separately? Does Microsoft have same version number for all products?
I wish i had enough money as the next guy to afford throwing around $1600 a year just to resolve issues with poorly documented code, but sadly i do not
There are thousands of customers paid it and they are happy about our product and they are renewing their licenses to be able to access to latest source code after 1 year. If anybody wants a refund, we always provide a money back without any question. Refund request ratio is smaller than 0.5% because developers love our framework and product.
My membership expired while i was resolving conflict issues with the code, and i immediately lost the ability to use git repo connected to that service
You can contact info#aspnetzero.com and request the latest version of the code (when the time your license expired). We always help to our customers about that. It would be better if you had contact with us.
I have a few (3) core projects I want to share across many solutions (12+).
So, say I have 12 websites and they use some shared back end core code (in this case I'm not talking about shared js, css or views - I'm talking about business objects, entity stuff, etc.).
I need to be able to identify which site has which version of the shared code in dev, test, prod, etc. so a developer can get the website code and get the right version of the shared code to develop or patch the website.
And then the MS build server needs to know which version of the shared code to get for the deployment.
To solve this, I'm seeing people branch that core code - which seems absurd to do 12+ times. (I do expect to branch the core code sometimes for things like hot fixes and long running projects.)
I'm also seeing people copy DLLs of the core code and check those in.
I would think I would list the dependencies for my solutions based on TFS label names somewhere so developers can easily get the apps running with the right code and given a tfs label the build server can get the code for the website and the proper version of the core code. I'm using TFS & VS 2013 at the moment too, so there's that.
So, is there a way to do this that's straightforward, supportable/scale-able and intuitive? Thanks - Peter
Labels in TFS is very limited. For example once the label created you couldn't change and update it. If one of your core projects updated, did you need to create a new label for it. If you did and use the new label for one of your solution. However you found there are some bugs in this update, you need a newer update of your core project to fix the bug. Then a newer label created, you need to manually maintain the dependencies which seems not to be an easy job.
Moreover how to list the dependencies for your solutions based on TFS label names? TFS don't have this built-in option, seems the only way is store it in a txt or someother files and check in the source control. Every time the developer open a website application need to check it first and get label from server to their workspace and work on it.
Usually the purpose of sharing code between projects is reducing maintenance. There’s two main code sharing paths: source and binary. The difference between them you could take a look at this blog: Code Sharing in Team Foundation Server
Sharing code between products is a primary cause of quality erosion and elevated bug counts. I would recommend you to build separately and sharing binary output through NuGet which use preferable.
Also take a look below similar questions:
Sharing code between solutions in TFS
TFS 2010 Branch Across Team Projects - Best Practices
Attempting to migrate a web part solution from farm solution to sandbox solution. The steps I have seen online outline changing a property at the project level which is a boolean called 'Sandbox Solution'. However I do not see this option when I view the properties of the project. Does anyone have and ideas on how to migrate a solution which contains multiple web parts from a farm solution to sandbox?
I am afraid this can't be done. When a farm solution is created and deployed it loads extra controls into the solution that allows the solution to easily access data outside of its container. An example is the user control. This control is not allowed in a Sandbox solution as it allows access to the SharePoint root. Just changing that option isn't going to revert that option because the entire solution is geared around it even if you don't use it. It will be deployed. I found the blog post you are talking about or one similar to it and have never seen that work. This is why you define your project type at the beginning because Visual Studio applies the different controls depending on your selection. Removing the sandbox and recompiling will not work.
On another note, you can however convert a sandbox solution to a farm solution. This is because you are moving from stronger security to "less"
I have a solution in VS2013 that has multiple projects, one of which is code from a library which I don't often contribute to but I frequently pull from a repo. I'm looking for a way to show "//TODO" comments in the Task List from only the project I'm currently working on.
As it stands, the task list is inundated with //TODOs that other people are working on. My workaround is to name all of my personal TODOs as //JOB, but even being able to view just one project's //JOBs at a time would be a big plus and would prevent me needing to invent new comment names for each project I have in the solution.
VS2103 doesn't contain this functionally and some people requested this feature in MSDN VS blog.
You can extend VS2013 with Resharper that has a nice ToDo explorer.
Have a look here:
http://www.jetbrains.com/resharper/webhelp80/Reference__Windows__To-do_Explorer.html
You can group your TODOs by namespaces or projects for example...
Let me know if that supports you question.