So I'm creating my project using a git source control and using some libraries from another repositories. But I'm also developer of this libraries and I want edit/debug them in my project so I can add it to project not alike binary dll but alike another project.
I found this article : Multiple projects in a solution vs. multiple projects in source control
But I'm working on Windows and usually just using Tortoise Git. I guess that will be really hard to configure it such way.
There is another idea. Do not add solution file to version control and create some readme how another developers must construct project and it's dependents.
Maybe someone already met or even solved such trouble, I'm interesting to know any solutions and variants for it.
Thank you.
At a company I used to work for, we ended up putting the projects themselves into different repo's which made managing them easier as opposed to 1 solution. We then wrote a batch file to simply put all the pieces back together and compile it correctly (just compiling the component Projects). This may not work for everyone but it is just a suggestion.
The reason we did this was because opening the solution in VS was getting to be very memory intensive for the machines and was becoming a giant mess of files.
Also this can be used so that teams only work on their specified software and can really only talk to the other components. This is a great way to enforce 3-tier/n-tier architecture design since you separate the projects out and let teams/developers only worry about what they're working on (not really fool proof but it helps).
In our company we usually have a solution consist of several projects, mostly dozen or several dozens. Those are coming from different repos 'cause some of those are general purpose libs, frameworks etc. We, however, use SVN with VS AnkhSVN plugin so there are completely no issues with commiting changes to more than one repo.
My assumption for you is to check whether Git VS plugins could work with seeral repos in one solution. More info on Git VS plugins here: Using Git with Visual Studio
BTW, accroding to 'one or many repos' discussion - we create one repo for a project. So if there are several parts of the project and some of those existed before and will most probably keep being after - those should not be placed in the project repo. Should something great be born within the project and we do believe this will overlive it - we could always migrate repo subtree to an independent SVN repo.
Related
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
I have read FAR too many posts on SO and I am now in analysis paralysis!
I work with Visual Studio 2010 and I have many small projects, many of which reference library/shared projects.
I don't really mind about having to check/re-build dependent projects if I make changes to shared code...I'll be putting TeamCity in place ASAP to assist with this, but for the moment, I just amend the code next time I work on a project. Many projects are "write once and forget", so they'll never need updating.
The team is very small at the moment (ME!) but new devs are expected early this year, but it will still be a very small in-house team, with fast project cycles if that makes any difference.
At the moment I have a very flat folder structure on disk, so ALL of my sln files are in a "development" folder on disk. Then there is a folder per VS project. This makes sharing pretty simple, and also leaves me with a single packages folder for nuget.
I am about to import everything into SVN (VisualSVN) and I'd like to start adding things like database scripts, docs, UAT tests, etc. etc.
Do I keep my flat structure and have a single trunk/branch/tag at
root level?
Do I expand the structure to an SVN folder-per-solution
and then have trunk/src, trunk/docs and manage things like nuget
packages with svn:eternals?
Do I hybrid this and have an SVN folder-per-solution but with docs in the VS solution?
NOTE: I am putting in SVN so I can bring in some Java development but keep source code managed in a single way. We will also share with a DB team, who want to put docs/sql sripts etc in there. I intend a separate repository each for DB and Java - but would like a "similar" folder structure for each of them.
NOTE2: I have some SVN user experience, but no Admin experience. The new devs have no experience at all (they are coming from an AS/400 background) so the simpler the solution the better! I've looked at repo per project and svn:extenals and whilst it is a great solution, it will require me to manage and maintain all the time (as well as do my own work! lol)
ANY advice from people who have "Been there, done that-GTTS" is very gratefully received.
OK, I now have the following local solution structure:
ALL my sln/suo files are in the same folder.
ALL of my project folders/files are subfolders
This makes sharing projects easy enough...but looks very messy and is hard to find anything :(
Should I be using svn:externals to manage "reference" projects, so I can branch/tag them?
Should I only reference built DLL's - and all the management that comes with doing that?
Should I let VS2010 manage my folders, and not care that I have lots of "nuget" folders etc.?
VERY VERY confused now...any decent answers? :(
NOTE: Will be adding TeamCity (or something similar) to the mix ASAP to provide CI capabilities. Any serious (and FREE) recommendations for CI also appreciated.
Here is a structure I use at work and for personal projects:
SVN structure:
root
shared_code
productA
trunk
branch_of_shared_code
productA projects
productA solution
branches
branch1
branch_of_shared_code
productA projects
productA solution
tags
...
productB
...
Periodically (when exactly depends on your needs) all changes from the main branch of shared code are merged into product's branches of the shared code. Changes to the shared code are either made in product's branch and then merged back, or in the main branch and then merge to products.
Product sources content:
Everything needed to build the complete package is considered as source. E.g. if you have DB scripts - they are part of sources. Tests - too. For documentation I usually add a separate project into the solution which contains all sources for building documentation and produces result in the output directory. Then a project creating installer will include it into the generated distributive.
Planning:
This may be debatable, but I prefer to store tasks list next to sources and branch/merge them together. If a task is completed in a branch, it's not completed in trunk until merge. More general planning may or may not be appropriate for storing next to the sources.
On disk:
First of all I believe in working with repository in such a way that it's OK to not store working copies for every product, but check them out on demand. Of course, checking out/deleting working copy for every change is impractical, so I have a directory for every product which I'm working frequently at this time, inside of it I check out branches I work on (trunk and some others). The rest of products need not to be checked out if you don't expect their development soon.
I work on several different software projects and I started building up some generic libraries with utilitarian functions that I use in all of them. Recently I had three or four projects going at once at different physical locations and it got painful to synchronize the libraries manually.
So I figured I should create a repository for these libraries so I can access them from anywhere. I'll sit down one final time to synchronize them between projects, commit them, and from now on I'll have the repository to make sure I keep things straight and keep the most recent version of the library working with all the relevant projects.
Because I'm working in Visual Studio 2010 I went with AnkhSVN. To my dismay, it does not seem to allow you to manage only projects within a solution---only the entire solution!
I go by the instructions here; they're pretty clear. There is some minor confusion in that an SVN "project" is not a Visual Studio "project", apparently.
So I select a project in the Solution Explorer, right click on it, and select "Add Selected Projects to Subversion...". The window that pops up uses the solution name for the field labeled "project name". That's a sign of trouble, but I can manually change it to be the actual project name. Then I can choose a repository, and create a folder for this project. So far so good.
But then for "local folder" it's a drop down list with the default selection being the location of the solution, and the only other options are moving farther up the tree. If I leave it as is and hit OK, AnkhSVN wants to put the entire solution in that directory I created (assumingly only for the selected project).
In fact if I select "Add Solution to Subversion..." I get an identical window.
I want Subversion manage only certain projects within a solution. With local solutions, that's how I make sure I keep my libraries universal; instead of just linking to the build I add the entire source to each solution so changes are "global". Now I need to do this for solutions at physically different locations and apparently AnkhSVN won't let me do this? Is it broken or is this by design?
There is no 'standard' way of providing a UI to handle this situation, but if you just checkout your working copies and bring all of the projects in a single layout AnkhSVN will just provide all the tools to work on this project.
The really hard problem -where we as AnkhSVN team are working on- is how we can provide the necessary UI to work with this kind of layouts easily. There is no easy way to layout your project if it is made out of different trees that live in different parts of your harddrive.
A workaround for some projects might be to create a parent working copy with externals (svn:externals) pointing towards the separate projects. In that case checking out the rooot project will automatically bring in the other projects.
It looks like this has been known since 2008 and the developers don't think it's important enough of an issue.
http://ankhsvn.open.collab.net/ds/viewMessage.do?dsForumId=582&dsMessageId=152095
You can proceed in this way.
Before make a solution with all projects follow the steps.
For each projects add them separately to svn (each projects with
it's own directory structure in svn)
Make a solution
Add each desired projects to solution.
In this way you can commit changes just to desired project and commits are not bundle to solution.
Later on you can easily separate projects from solution (delete, move to other solutions, etc).
We're making the switch from SourceGear Vault to TortoiseSVN with VisualSVN for Visual Studio integration - absolutely love it. However, there are multiple class libraries that we reference in multiple different applications that aren't a part of the working copy root in any of the applications. What's the best way to deal with this so that we can continue to utilize Visual Studio integration, but still keep various class libraries located outside of each project/application's root? SourceGear doesn't have an issue with this.
It is possible to add class libraries separately just using TortoiseSVN in explorer, but there's no ability to commit changes to anything outside of the working copy from within Visual Studio; neither are there the VisualSVN "traffic lights" indicating status for these outside of working copy class libraries.
By the way, we're also going with the "one repository with many projects" route as opposed to multiple repositories, especially as that is how we have worked for years to this point.
UPDATE:
I re-read some things that I had looked at before and discovered that svn:externals don't just refer to using code in different repositories, but can also be used to use multiple working copies in VisualSVN.
See http://www.visualsvn.com/support/topic/00007/ and http://svnbook.red-bean.com/en/1.2/svn.advanced.externals.html
However, is this the best way to deal with this issue? There's a good thread that goes through things, but doesn't completely resolve things.
Therefore, use svn:externals or not? Use multiple repositories or not? Again, for years we have referenced the code in shared class libraries amongst multiple solutions/applications and this works for us. Now how best to make this work with VisualSVN?
Found the best answers here:
Referenced Projects
Sometimes it is useful to construct a working copy that is made out of a number of different checkouts. For example, you may want different subdirectories to come from different locations in a repository, or perhaps from different repositories altogether. If you want every user to have the same layout, you can define the svn:externals properties.
And here:
Include a common sub-project
Sometimes you will want to include another project within your working copy, perhaps some library code. You don't want to make a duplicate of this code in your repository because then you would lose connection with the original (and maintained) code. Or maybe you have several projects which share core code. There are at least 3 ways of dealing with this.
I understand it's been more than ten years since you asked this question, but I am glad to tell you that there was progress in implementing support for multiple working copies in the VisualSVN plug-in.
VisualSVN 7.1 and 6.5 support multiple working copies within a single solution. The new functionality is available to Visual Studio 2019 and 2017 users.
Download the latest VisualSVN builds from the main download page. Please also see the article KB7: Using Multiple Working Copies in VisualSVN.
We use Subversion as our source control system and store the VisualStudio project files (vcproj) in the source control system as is normal I think. With Subversion we don't use any form of file locking, so if two developers are working on the same project at the same time and both add files to the project, or change settings, the second one to commit has to merge the changes.
How do you merge these changes?
The vcproj files are just text files so it is possible to edit them by hand but they are not very amenable to hand editing, especially by junior developers.
The ways I can think of are
Get the latest version from svn and re-add all local changes manually
Edit the file by hand to resolve any conflicts from an automatic merge
Implement some form of locking scheme to prevent simultaneous changes
Have an agreement between developers so they do not make simultaneous changes
Currently we are using the first option of re-adding all changes manually but this is time consuming and I was wondering if there is a better way.
With source files the automatic merge feature works most of the time and we don't get many conflicts.
I've found that option 2 (edit the files by hand) generally works fairly well, as long as you're using a good diff tool (I use WinMerge). The main problem I've run into is that Visual Studio will sometimes reorder the file. But, if you have a good diff/merge tool then it should be able to differentiate between changed content and moved content. That can help a lot.
You might find Project: Merge or Tools for SLN file useful
This is a tough problem and I think a weakness in the Visual Studio architecture. The way we found round it was to not have the proj files in source control at all and to have a build script that handled the configuration settings.
The alternative was very messy and we could not guarantee consistent builds or environments between developers. This led to a huge number of downstream integration problems and eventually we took the draconian step of removing the project files from source control.
The developers environments could still become misaligned but it showed up when they tried to build things themselves.
Using TFS here, but I don't think it makes a difference.
We also don't lock, and sometimes have to deal with merging project files. I've never found it to be that complex or much of an issue. Rarely do we ever experience issues that can't be merged automatically, and the manual merge process is pretty much trivial.
There's only one caveat to this: Check in often! If you make major changes to the project structure and don't check them in immediately those changes can start compounding the complexity of later merges. If I make a major change to the structure of a project, I usually give everybody a heads up. I'll ask them all to check in their current work, and then take care of the merge myself.
I found this recently: http://www.codeproject.com/KB/macros/vcproj_formatter.aspx
If you run this tool on a vcproj file and on a modified version of it then you can merge them together easily with your favorite text merge tool, and in addition the result is a more compact pretty vcproj file.
Options 1 and 2 are not mutually exclusive - if the developer is junior level, let them use option 1 (re-get the project file and re-do the changes) if that's more comfortable for them. For more senior developers, option 2 (merge using a merge tool) is perfectly fine.
I think this is a situation that currently has no magic bullet - sometimes merging is a pain.
We use a diff tool (WinMerge) to merge changes. The project files are (for the most part) really straight-forward XML. The key here, though, is that there never should be any surprises when merging, because good communication is part of the bed-rock of effective source control.
Simultaneous changes to the project are perfectly fine as long as people communicate.