I am wanting to setup a project and potentially an existing project to be SVN version controlled. I am using uberSVN for the svn server. I have installed AnkhSVN for visual studio.
Currently, the team I am working with is using visual source safe and one of the problems we have is when someone adds a reference to a DLL, it modifies the project file as you would expect, but our paths are different between different team members (XP boxes, 7, you get the idea). What I was wanting is making the project file ignored when checking in/out so that we don't mess up the references for everyone else.
Is there a way I can make SVN ignore these files within the plugin? One of the side effects of this is a person would not know if a new file has been added in the project as this modifies the project file. Other than telling everyone "hey, you need to manually add this file to your project," is there a cleaner way of doing it?
If you copy the DLL to a folder inside your VS solution folder before linking to it, I think the project link will be relative not absolute. So you can check the DLL and the updated VS project into your configuration management and everyone should be able to share it.
You should start using virtual paths for development work; that way each team member can keep work-related files at any physical location but the virtual path (the one seen by tools is always the same.
For example, my team does all work under Q:\. My physical source for work is under physical path C:\Work\<project_name> where the project_name part depends on the project. When I want to work on a given project, I map the Q:\ virtual path to the right physical path using
subst q: c:\work\project_name
When I need to switch, I run a similar command. This way there's no need to worry about different paths on different computers. This worked very well for the whole team and eliminated most issues you describe above. The only thing you need to make sure is that everyone always uses the virtual path (Q:), not the physical path when dealing with project-related files. For my team it took about a week to get used to that, after that there were no more problems.
Your project file is an important part of your project so ignoring it in the source control tool will eventually lead to problems. I recommend you don't do it (even if you can).
Edit:
If you have DLL-s in different physical folders on different machines, the best choice is to copy those DLL-s (and their dependencies) to a known location. It's fine that they can't run from there, as long as the compiler finds them.
This known location could be inside your virtual path or a common physical path (if the same DLL-s are needed for multiple projects). You can use Dependency Walker to determine what dependencies you need for native DLL-s and Reflector for .NET DLL-s.
If the size/number of DLL-s is so large that creating a copy is not an option, you can actually tell AnkhSVN to ignore certain versioned files when committing changes. Right-click the file, select Subversion > Move to Change List > ignore-on-commit. After this the file will show up in the commit dialog unselected but you can still commit it if you manually select it.
I'd like to use visual studio to store in source control xml files coming from a server.
I have a request like http://server/query.aspx?FILE_ID=1234 that allows me to download an xml file. Those file are part of our development activities, that's why I'm looking for a convenient way of integrating those file in source control.
I'd like to have a project containing all the xml files I want to check-in in source control and add a pre-build command allowing to download the files, but I did not find any convenient way of doing it.
People have a tendency to forgetting to do it manually, and we have already seen all the possible scenarios: lost files, released version without the ability to know the exact configuration used, ... I'd like to automated this step so that it does not happen again in the future.
I'm sure there is a simple and smart solution, but I could not find it. Any suggestion would be appreciated.
You should be able to use wget in a pre-build action to fetch the latest version of the files. I can't think of a reason why that wouldn't work.
Personally i would consider finding a way to automatically commit those files to source control whenever they change on the server. I've never used tfs, but I assume there is a commandline-client which allows you to commit files in a scripted way. If you don't have any control over when the files change you could do this every N minutes on a machine which is always on.
You can write a (powershell) script that does the fetching, and checkin of the file before your build starts. That's how we fetch external assemblies to be included in our build.
To get you started, take a look at these powershell functions for TFS interaction:
http://www.brokenwire.net/bw/Programming/73/ (TFS 2008)
This is not a work-stopper in any way, but I thought I should ask anyway because it is a little annoying. Let's say I create a new project and start putting source files in a directory other than the default that shows up the first time. Afterwords, whenever I open the project, I have to navigate to the source directory once during that session. Like I said, not a big deal (but if solvable, then it's icing on the cake). Quite a few times I absentmindedly put the source file in the default directory and end up committing that file to the SVN and if I am lucky, going through all the files, removing them, then adding them again.
So my question is, is there any way to specify the default source directory on a per project basis?
I have run into the same nuisance. I like to put the public interface header files for a library in a separate directory, but end up with file directory typos because I forget to navigate to the correct directory when saving a new file. Unfortunately, Visual Studio does not offer a setting to change the default directory for new C++ source files.
I had the same problem when I started using build systems (CMake, Premake) which requires me to keep my project files separate from my source files, which hampered my workflow.
Although changing the default source directory seems impossible, if you aren't afraid to spend money, the workaround I found was to use the Visual Assist extension.
You can bind a shortcut of your choise to the Create File command which creates
a new file relative to the directory or your open file.
I'd also recommend to base one's workflow around the wonderful
Create from Usage command (which I think greatly boosts
productivity) which almost eliminates the need to manually create files.
The extension is great, albeit a bit costly. I would love to see Microsoft incorporate these features directly in the IDE eventually as they are found vanilla in a lot of other IDEs e.g. Eclipse, Intellij.
There might be some free extensions available that does the same thing, but I haven't found any.
Changing the Default Project Folder may help. This page demonstrates how to change the default for Visual Studio 2005, and it should be the same for later versions.
I use subversion with TortoiseSVN on projects at work and my personal ones.
I was wondering what is considered best practice in terms of being able to setup your repo so that doing a SVN Checkout and VisualSVN for Visual Studio will get you all that you need to compile
...
but I want to be able to mark certain files so that they will not be recommended for any SVN Commits. Ideally the file would no longer even be marked as changed (I'm anal like that).
The classic example of this would be an app.config that will have different connect strings for each developer machines.
Seth
The usual approach is to create a template file and commit that, then add the configuration file to svn:ignore. You could even go a step further and add a pre-compile step in Visual Studio that checks for the configuration file and, if not present, creates it from the template. Depending on the values to be set in the configuration this might or might not be a good idea.
I usually commit a web.config.template and let the other developers copy this to web.config and do any changes they want. They can then select both their web.config and the web.config.template file and, using Tortoise (or any other similar functionality) show differences between the two files. This would show their local changes, and also any changes done to the template.
Use a local svn:ignore
http://sdesmedt.wordpress.com/2006/12/10/how-to-make-subversion-ignore-files-and-folders/
What about having a app.config.example shared in the repository and svn:ignore the files you want to keep for yourself ?
If you're using Visual Studio, most (but not all) project systems support the "Exclude From Source Control" action. You won't find it on the context menu unfortunately. Have to select the file(s) in Solution Explorer, then File -> Source Control -> Exclude. From then on, the project/solution will not make any requests to the active source control provider upon editing/saving/etc (depending on your Tools -> Options -> SCC -> Environment settings).
Naturally this won't work if you leave VS and accidentally checkout/checkin the excluded file from Tortoise.
Visual Studio solutions contain two types of hidden user files. One is the solution .suo file which is a binary file. The other is the project .user file which is a text file. Exactly what data do these files contain?
I've also been wondering whether I should add these files to source control (Subversion in my case). If I don't add these files and another developer checks out the solution, will Visual Studio automatically create new user files?
These files contain user preference configurations that are in general specific to your machine, so it's better not to put it in SCM. Also, VS will change it almost every time you execute it, so it will always be marked by the SCM as 'changed'.
I don't include either, I'm in a project using VS for 2 years and had no problems doing that. The only minor annoyance is that the debug parameters (execution path, deployment target, etc.) are stored in one of those files (don't know which), so if you have a standard for them you won't be able to 'publish' it via SCM for other developers to have the entire development environment 'ready to use'.
You don't need to add these -- they contain per-user settings, and other developers won't want your copy.
Others have explained why having the *.suo and *.user files under source control is not a good idea.
I'd like to suggest that you add these patterns to the svn:ignore property for 2 reasons:
So other developers won't wind up
with one developer's settings.
So when you view status, or commit
files, those files won't clutter the code base and obscure new files you need to add.
We don't commit the binary file (*.suo), but we commit the .user file. The .user file contains for example the start options for debugging the project. You can find the start options in the properties of the project in the tab "Debug". We used NUnit in some projects and configured the nunit-gui.exe as the start option for the project. Without the .user file, each team member would have to configure it separately.
Hope this helps.
Since I found this question/answer through Google in 2011, I thought I'd take a second and add the link for the *.SDF files created by Visual Studio 2010 to the list of files that probably should not be added to version control (the IDE will re-create them). Since I wasn't sure that a *.sdf file may have a legitimate use elsewhere, I only ignored the specific [projectname].sdf file from SVN.
Why does the Visual Studio conversion wizard 2010 create a massive SDF database file?
No, you should not add them to source control since - as you said - they're user specific.
SUO (Solution User Options): Records
all of the options that you might
associate with your solution so that
each time you open it, it includes
customizations that you
have made.
The .user file contains the user options for the project (while SUO is for the solution) and extends the project file name (e.g. anything.csproj.user contains user settings for the anything.csproj project).
This appears to be Microsoft's opinion on the matter:
Adding (and editing) .suo files to source control
I don't know why your project stores the DebuggingWorkingDirectory in
the suo file. If that is a user specific setting you should consider
storing that in the *.proj.user filename. If that setting is shareable
between all users working on the project you should consider storing
it in the project file itself.
Don't even think of adding the suo file to source control! The SUO
(soluton user options) file is meant to contain user-specific
settings, and should not be shared amongst users working on the same
solution. If you'd be adding the suo file in the scc database I don't
know what other things in the IDE you'd break, but from source control
point of view you will break web projects scc integration, the Lan vs
Internet plugin used by different users for VSS access, and you could
even cause the scc to break completely (VSS database path stored in
suo file that may be valid for you may not be valid for another user).
Alin Constantin (MSFT)
By default Microsoft's Visual SourceSafe does not include these files in the source control because they are user-specific settings files. I would follow that model if you're using SVN as source control.
Visual Studio will automatically create them. I don't recommend putting them in source control. There have been numerous times where a local developer's SOU file was causing VS to behave erratically on that developers box. Deleting the file and then letting VS recreate it always fixed the issues.
No.
I just wanted a real short answer, and there wasn't any.
On the MSDN website, it clearly states that
The solution user options (.suo) file contains per-user solution
options. This file should not be checked in to source code control.
So I'd say it is pretty safe to ignore these files while checking in stuff to your source control.
I wouldn't. Anything that could change per "user" is usually not good in source control. .suo, .user, obj/bin directories
These files are user-specific options, which should be independent of the solution itself. Visual Studio will create new ones as necessary, so they do not need to be checked in to source control. Indeed, it would probably be better not to as this allows individual developers to customize their environment as they see fit.
You cannot source-control the .user files, because that's user specific. It contains the name of remote machine and other user-dependent things. It's a vcproj related file.
The .suo file is a sln related file and it contains the "solution user options" (startup project(s), windows position (what's docked and where, what's floating), etc.)
It's a binary file, and I don't know if it contains something "user related".
In our company we do not take those files under source control.
They contain the specific settings about the project that are typically assigned to a single developer (like, for example, the starting project and starting page to start when you debug your application).
So it's better not adding them to version control, leaving VS recreate them so that each developer can have the specific settings they want.
.user is the user settings, and I think .suo is the solution user options. You don't want these files under source control; they will be re-created for each user.
Others have explained that no, you don't want this in version control. You should configure your version control system to ignore the file (e.g. via a .gitignore file).
To really understand why, it helps to see what's actually in this file. I wrote a command line tool that lets you see the .suo file's contents.
Install it on your machine via:
dotnet tool install -g suo
It has two sub-commands, keys and view.
suo keys <path-to-suo-file>
This will dump out the key for each value in the file. For example (abridged):
nuget
ProjInfoEx
BookmarkState
DebuggerWatches
HiddenSlnFolders
ObjMgrContentsV8
UnloadedProjects
ClassViewContents
OutliningStateDir
ProjExplorerState
TaskListShortcuts
XmlPackageOptions
BackgroundLoadData
DebuggerExceptions
DebuggerFindSource
DebuggerFindSymbol
ILSpy-234190A6EE66
MRU Solution Files
UnloadedProjectsEx
ApplicationInsights
DebuggerBreakpoints
OutliningStateV1674
...
As you can see, lots of IDE features use this file to store their state.
Use the view command to see a given key's value. For example:
$ suo view nuget --format=utf8 .suo
nuget
?{"WindowSettings":{"project:MyProject":{"SourceRepository":"nuget.org","ShowPreviewWindow":false,"ShowDeprecatedFrameworkWindow":true,"RemoveDependencies":false,"ForceRemove":false,"IncludePrerelease":false,"SelectedFilter":"UpdatesAvailable","DependencyBehavior":"Lowest","FileConflictAction":"PromptUser","OptionsExpanded":false,"SortPropertyName":"ProjectName","SortDirection":"Ascending"}}}
More information on the tool here: https://github.com/drewnoakes/suo
Using Rational ClearCase the answer is no. Only the .sln & .*proj should be registered in source code control.
I can't answer for other vendors. If I recall correctly, these files are "user" specific options, your environment.
Don't add any of those files into version control. These files are auto generated with work station specific information, if checked-in to version control that will cause trouble in other work stations.
No, they shouldn't be committed to source control as they are developer/machine-specific local settings.
GitHub maintain a list of suggested file types for Visual Studio users to ignore at https://github.com/github/gitignore/blob/master/VisualStudio.gitignore
For svn, I have the following global-ignore property set:
*.DotSettings.User
*.onetoc2
*.suo .vs PrecompiledWeb thumbs.db obj bin debug
*.user *.vshost.*
*.tss
*.dbml.layout
As explained in other answers, both .suo and .user shouldn't be added to source control, since they are user/machine-specific (BTW .suo for newest versions of VS was moved into dedicated temporary directory .vs, which should be kept out of source control completely).
However if your application requires some setup of environment for debugging in VS (such settings are usually kept in .user file), it may be handy to prepare a sample file (naming it like .user.SAMPLE) and add it to source control for references.
Instead of hard-coded absolute path in such file, it makes sense to use relative ones or rely on environment variables, so the sample may be generic enough to be easily re-usable by others.
If you set your executable dir dependencies in ProjectProperties>Debugging>Environment, the paths are stored in '.user' files.
Suppose I set this string in above-mentioned field: "PATH=C:\xyz\bin"
This is how it will get stored in '.user' file:
<LocalDebuggerEnvironment>PATH=C:\xyz\bin$(LocalDebuggerEnvironment)</LocalDebuggerEnvironment>
This helped us a lot while working in OpenCV. We could use different versions of OpenCV for different projects. Another advantage is, it was very easy to set up our projects on a new machine. We just had to copy corresponding dependency dirs. So for some projects, I prefer to add the '.user' to source control.
Even though, it is entirely dependent on projects. You can take a call based on your needs.