Currently building a build process with phing. Each time I want to deploy to live, I move the staging version with the following command
<move file="${next_version}" tofile="${current_version}" />
but, since move kind of inherits from copy (as stated in the documentation), this procedure really takes some time and is not comparible to any shell move command. Is there a metter way to call move, or do I have to fallback to the execTask (seeing no sense in move then, at least in that case)
Thanks in advance
The move task really copies files, which is crap. Please open a feature request on the phing bug tracker.
Related
I'm looking of a DTSX file that I didn't make, trying to get an overview of how it works. But I've noticed that every time I open up an Execute SQL Task or File System Task it checks out the dtsx from TFS. I haven't changed anything, so why does it always check out the file?
Because the dtsx file is overly burdensome and mixes UI and data/programming elements in the same backing file? winces
Without seeing the specific file, what I had noticed back when I used version control systems that subscribed to the checkout/modify/checkin pattern is that things such as package configuration, expressions, etc may get re-evaluated as you open tasks which I assume the TFS modify daemon in VS detects the file could get dirty and so checks it out to help you.
You'll also notice that if you run the package, sometimes it gets checked out and marked as modified. Which is totally fun as you get to play: what was I doing before I left my desk? Did I actually make a change or was I just looking?
Not helping matters is that the save action from visual studio always triggers two changes: version build (which is a monotonically increasing number) and the corresponding version guid.
Not an answer, but I can commiserate with your experience. The answer likely lies in the engineering minds in Redmond and was never publicly documented.
I have created database project in visual studio 2013 from existing database. Then I have done lot of changes in database project like modify stored procedures, post deployment script, table structure, etc . Now database project is ready to deploy. But I am worry if any script fails then How I can retain the original state though it build properly.
Please suggest that if any query fails then I want ROLLBACK the all changes that I have made in database project.
Firstly you need to trust your tools and either believe they will work or find other tools.
While you are building the trust I would add a create backup to the pre-deployment script or run a backup before you deploy then if anything goes wrong you can restore and figure out what went wrong.
As David said to roll-back, you would get the previously deployed dacpac and generate a new deployment script from that but fixing forward is almost always the correct thing to do rather than rolling back to a previous version.
ed
Have you been checking your changes into version control? If so, all you need to do is to revert back to the last known good version.
Or... simply work out why it's failing now and fix the root cause?
I used Db projects some time ago and as far as I remember the deploy script was wrapped in a transaction. It is possible to generate sql script without executing it. That setting was somewhere in DB project settings. You can take a look inside that script and make sure that it'll rollback on error.
Doing a backup would still be a recommended practice especially when you deploy to production.
when working on important scripts I developed a habit of always starting a transaction and commenting out the commit.
If you accidentally run it, it won't take effect. The commented out commit would only come out when the thing was done.
While this answer indicates that you CAN revert in source control (Assuming SSDT at this point) it would be nice to get a pointer to the exact process to do this. On a file by file basis the history works the same but how to revert the entire database at once isn't immediately obvious.
I want to create a simple autoupdate that downloads the new version of my software (in a temp folder), runs the installer (I'm using Innosetup) which will take care of closing my application and then, after the setup is complete, I would like to remove the installer file.
What's the best approach to do that?
I saw there are a number of libraries that take care of everything but I have written almost all the code used to check for updates and I'd just need to be able to run the installer.
Thanks a lot.
You can use the NAppUpdate framework to achieve that quite easily.
Check this out: http://www.sjurvarhaug.com/nappupdate-to-automatically-download-and-execute-installer
I've just implemented build and deploy process which consists of java files, ant script and cmd files. In the process, a release manager will have to check out source, hit the build.cmd button and then carry a zip file over to a server.
I am wondering if it is worthwhile to make a GUI for it? So that the release manager does not need to check out source manually for example?
How do I start? I have quite limited knowledge of javax, but I very much like to learn.
Thanks,
Sarah
This sounds like something that could be handled by Hudson. It can check out source, run Ant scripts, etc., saving you the trouble of maintaining a GUI. I'd give that a shot before rolling your own.
I have helped develop the build process at my current company. The way we currently do it is with a script file. It checks out the latest code from the stable branch of our repository, performs some steps to get some data from a database (such as static SQL data that needs to be loaded at deployment), then compresses everything. The file is then distributed to our production servers and then the setup routine is executed. Everything is automatic and the script is written in Python. Python is great for these types of things because of the sheer number of libraries it has to help the developer.
Perhaps it may be useful to build a GUI for your deployment procedure -- typically this would be useful if the deployment requires user interaction to make decisions, such as "Which server shall I deploy to?", etc. But, if it's just a matter of doing things automatically, then a script file's the way to go. Choose your favourite language and dive in -- I of course recommend Python.
If you'd like to learn how to make a simple GUI in Java (since that seems to be what your company is familiar with), you should check out the stuff at this site:
http://java.sun.com/docs/books/tutorial/uiswing/index.html
I learned everything I know about Java from that site. The section on GUI programming is great.
Best of luck!
Shad
Like many programmers, I'm prone to periodic fits of "inspiration" wherein I will suddenly See The Light and perform major surgery on my code. Typically, this works out well, but there are times when I discover later that — due to lack of sleep/caffeine or simply an imperfect understanding of the problem — I've done something very foolish.
When this happens, the next step is do reverse the damage. Most easily, this means the undo stack in my editor… unless I closed the file at some point. Version control is next, but if I made changes between my most recent commit (I habitually don't commit code which breaks the build) and the moment of inspiration, they are lost. It wasn't in the repository, so the code never existed.
I'd like set up my work environment in such a way that I needn't worry about this, but I've never come up with a completely satisfactory solution. Ideally:
A new, recoverable version would be created every time I save a file.
Those "auto-saved" versions won't clutter the main repository. (The vast majority of them would be completely useless; I hit Ctrl-S several times a minute.)
The "auto-saved" versions must reside locally so that I can browse through them very quickly. A repository with a 3-second turnaround simply won't do when trying to scan quickly through hundreds of revisions.
Options I've considered:
Just commit to the main repository before making a big change, even if the code may be broken. Cons: when "inspired", I generally don't have the presence of mind for this; breaks the build.
A locally-hosted Subversion repository with auto-versioning enabled, mounted as a "Web Folder". Cons: doesn't play well with working copies of other repositories; mounting proper WebDAV folders in Windows is painful at best.
As with the previous method, but using a branch in the main repository instead and merging to trunk whenever I would normally manually commit. Cons: not all hosted repositories can have auto-versioning enabled; doesn't meet points 2 and 3 above; can't safely reverse-merge from trunk to branch.
Switch to a DVCS and "combine" all my little commits when pushing. Cons: I don't know the first thing about DVCSes; sometimes Subversion is the only tool available; I don't know how to meet point 1 above.
Store working copy on a versioned file system. Cons: do these exist for Windows? If so, Google has failed to show me the way.
Does anyone know of a tool or combination of tools that will let me get what I want? Or have I set myself up with contradictory requirements? (Which I rather strongly suspect.)
Update: After more closely examining the tools I already use (sigh), it turns out that my text editor has a very nice multi-backup feature which meets my needs almost perfectly. It not only has an option for storing all backups in a "hidden" folder (which can then be added to global ignores for VCSes), but allows browsing and even diffing against backups right in the editor.
Problem solved. Thanks for the advice, folks!
Distributed Version Control. (mercurial, git, etc...)
The gist of the story is that there are no checkouts, only clones of a repository.
Your commits are visible only to you until you push it back into the main branch.
Want to do radical experimental change? Clone the repository, do tons of commits on your computer. If it works out, push it back; if not, then just rollback or trash the repo.
Most editors store the last version of your file before the save to a backup file. You could customize that process to append a revision number instead of the normal tilde. You'd then have a copy of the file every time you saved. If that would eat up too much disk space, you could opt for creating diffs for each change and customizing your editor to sequentially apply patches until you get to the revision you want.
if you use Windows Vista, 7 or Windows Server 2003 or newer you could use Shadow Copy. Basically the properties window for your files will have a new tab 'previous version' that keeps track of the previous version of the file.
the service should automatically generate the snapshot, but just to be safe you can run the following command right after your moment of "inspiration"
'vssadmin create shadow /for=c:\My Project\'
it has defiantly saved my ass quite a few times.
Shadow Copy
I think it is time to switch editors. Emacs has a variable version-control, which determines whether Emacs will automatically create multiple backups for a file when saving it, naming them foo.~1~, foo.~2~ etc. Additional variables determine how many backup copies to keep.