I am using MTM 2010 for runing automated tests and implemented a custom diagnostic data adapter (DDA) collecting log files which are created when tests are running.
When I perform some changes on the DDA implementation and increment its assembly version and deploy the new version to the machine MTM is running on this DDA appears over again in the list of DDAs in MTM (meanwhile I have three of them in the list)
How can I get rid of the older versions of my DDA appearing in the MTM?
It seems like there are some "artifacts" stored on TFS for each assembly version (GUID).
If I try to set up an older version of DDA hitting one in MTM I get a warning that the editor can not be startet so I only can edit the XML representation of the DDA settings.
That is a kind of "verification" the older version is really not installed anymore.
It really looks like if DDA of a particular version will be recognized by MTM for the first time the information about it will be stored somewhere on TFS...
Additional information:
If I deploy a new version of DDA the files belonging to the old version will be overridden.
I deploy new version to:
a machine MTM is running on (in order to be able to set up this DDA)
a VM where my tests are running on (where a Test Agent is installed)
I finally found a solution, see following blog:
Unregister a Data Collector from TFS
Related
Is there a simple way to set the TFS Build Number to be an Assembly Version during build?
I've seen many examples of the other way around (i.e. a build number updates the assembly version).
We already use the SharedAssemblyInfo implementation from here, so we would like to leverage this setup during the build process.
Currently using TFS 2012 with Release Management template (ReleaseDefaultTemplate.11.1.xaml).
Without modifying the build process template? No. Even then, the build number is set prior to compilation (or, IIRC, even syncing the code from source control), so you're in for a wild ride trying to get the behavior you want.
We have something about 20 people in our team and we are using sonar for now to analyse new code before submiting it to the main stream. So each designer uses it's own Sonar installed on his machine.
What I'm trying to do is to create a one instance of the Sonar which each designer will be able to use. The only concern I have is what will happen if:
One designer will launch analysis on one revision of file and right after that the second designer will launch analysis on another revision of this file (in the worst case we can have a bunch of such a files). First designer won't be able to see his violations and won't be able to see code he wrote at all. Do we have some mechanism to overcome this?
What will happen if two designers will analyse the same project at the same time? AFAIK, Sonar won't allow them to do so. Any workaround for this?
Of course, we can, somaehow, create a project on the sonar side for each team member, but this has it's drawbacks, such as issues, marked as false positive in one proect won't appear as such an issues in another project and so on.
Any ideas on such an issues?
What you probably want to set up is:
a central Sonar instance that analyses the code base on a regular basis (for instance every day) based on the code located in the repository. This instance should be the reference and the project manager(s) will use it to monitor the project.
ask the developers to run local analyses before commiting their code:
either using Sonar Eclipse if you're coding in Java, C++ or Python. Everything is perfectly described in the documentation, more precisely the "Checking code prior to commit" section
or using the Issues Report plugin if your language is not supported yet in Sonar Eclipse.
I'm developing a project in C# using VS2010. I'm using svn 1.7 for my version control. What I want is a (FREE) tool that runs on the build server and checks for fresh commits. If the commit breaks the trunk then I want email notifications sent (I have a sendmail openbsd server on the network I can use). I also want this tool (or another tool) to run all my MSTest tests periodically and send emails if there is a failed test.
Any suggestions? I already built my own crude windows service to check for failed builds. But this was before I heard that tools for this sort of thing already exist. I could easily have this thing run all my tests with mstest.exe and then parse the xml results files, but I'm wondering if my time would be better spent just installing and configuring a proper tool for all of this.
There will be at most 4 developers.
Thanks in advance for the help!
I have some experience with TeamCity and Hudson/Jenkins.
I found TeamCity fairly easy to setup and it seems to meet your needs of:
MSTest integration out of the box
Email notifications
TeamCity is free for up to 20 build configurations and has an easy to use Web/GUI interface.
Have a look at CruiseControl.Net
built in support for Subversion
no limits on number of build configurations
email notifications using the 'Email Publisher'
web interface and desktop build notifications via CCTray
I'm trying to setup my VisualStudio project to set the assembly version based on the latest subversion revision number as described on this page. But the version number always seems to lag one revision.
I've split out the assembly version attribute into a separate file, VersionInfo.cs, that is updated with a pre build event.
I'm using the following code to display the version number in the title of my form:
System.Reflection.Assembly assem = System.Reflection.Assembly.GetExecutingAssembly();
this.Text = "My Program Version: " + assem.GetName().Version.ToString();
Here's an walk through of what's happening.
I commit my project so that it is at the latest revision.
Using TortiseSVN I use show log to see that I'm at revision 55
I build my solution.
I then open VersionInfo.cs and see that the pre-build event correctly overwrote this file as
[assembly: System.Reflection.AssemblyVersion("0.1.55.*")]
Yet when I run the program the title bar displays and old version 0.1.52.20486
Next I open the project file in notepad, and change something, such as adding a blank line, and then save the file.
VisualStudio shows a notification that the project file has changed and prompts me to reload the project which I accept
Now when I build and run the program the form shows version 0.1.55.20645
I make a change to something in the project, and commit to SubVersion.
TortiseSVN confirms my working copy is now at revision 56.
I build my project and VersionInfo.cs is correctly updated to
[assembly: System.Reflection.AssemblyVersion("0.1.56.*")]
I try running the application again and the forms title shows 0.1.55.20750 rather then 0.1.56.xxxxxx
Also I've noticed that even if I rebuild/rerun my application the build number (the last number in the version number) is also not updated. It was my understanding that the asterisk would be replaced my a new number at each build.
Any one have any idea what's going on?
I haven't worked with the specific tool you are using but the tool I am using requires you to do an update on your sandbox after your commit. Has something to do with the tool using the revision number retrieved by the last update, not the last commit.
When you checkin a file, the revision number is incremented as you know. The problem is, you do not know what that revision number will be when you checkin - you only find out after checkin.
So, if you take the latest revision number, build your project, then checkin - the number used will always be out of date. What you really want is to be able to checkin, then get the revnum of the commit you've just performed, and then build your project with the correct version number.
Obviously this is not possible.
There is a way round it - use a CI system that builds your project immediately after checkin (through a post-commit hook). These will checkout the latest version you've just added, update your version.cs file, then build. The disadvantage is that your version.cs file will never contain the correct version number (unless the CI system then checks just it in again)
The best way to handle this is when you do your build.
I use Jenkins as my continuous build server instead of relying on doing a manual build on my system. If you don't use something like Jenkins (Hudson, Atlassian Bamboo and CruiseControl are three other popular Continuous Build servers), you should. This way, your official builds are not dependent upon a particular developer machine.
If you do use Jenkins, you can now use Nant or even Ant to help you manipulate your build. We are doing this now with Jenkins and Ant.
What I do is use msbuild.exe to build my project using Jenkins. Before I do a build, I use Ant to retrieve the Subversion revision number (actually, we use Jenkin's build number, but the theory is the same) to modify the assembly file with the correct version. Then, I do a build itself. The results is the correct Subversion revision number (err.. in our case the Jenkins Build Number) in the assembly file when it's built.
Come to think of it, you can probably do what you're doing now to set the Revision in the Assembly file. Jenkins will then build the project with the correct Revision number in the assembly file. You download the built package, and you'll see the correct version number in the title bar.
We're currently using CruiseControl.NET as a continuous integration server for a number of ASP.NET web projects, but we're also evaluating TeamCity.
This is working great for our build server.
What we'd like to setup is a customer facing test server. I'm thinking that when we are happy for our latest development version to be released to the client for test, we could label it in SVN.
I'd then like a second build server to build this version ready for the client to see.
The question is this - is there any way to get either CruiseControl.NET or TeamCity to build only the latest labelled version of the code in a repository?
If anyone has any alternative suggestions, that'd also be greatly appreciated!
You could have a designated location or branch in your subversion repository e.g. \release then point the second TeamCity build server at that.
When your are happy with trunk then overwrite the existing location. The second build server will pick this up, build it, and even deploy it to a test server.
I don't think there's a way to do this directly in TeamCity. You can however configure your build trigger to filter on files and/or users. So, if you touch a given file to indicate release status in addition to or rather than labelling, you can use that.
The trigger filter could be, for example (untested):
+:/ReleaseVersion.cs