I'm setting up my team's source control + build/integration process from scratch. We were using VSS and a tool we created in-house to perform the build process. We decided to move on to a more modern environment. I have the SVN running, and I would like to set a continuous integration process with CruiseControl.NET.
Is there a good step-by-step starter guide that will get me started with the best practices of this tool?
Before leveraging CruiseControl to it's fullest extent, you need to create an automated build script that can be run by msbuild or nant. After you get your project building in one step, then you can start integrating CruiseControl into the mix. Here are some resources to help get you started:
CruiseControl.net Wiki - A very good resource.
CruiseControl.net SourceControl Block - Shows how to use svn with CruiseControl.net with the sourcecontrol block
Getting CruiseControl.net, MsBuild, and SVN setup - A resource stepping you through the steps to get everything meshing together.
An excellent resource I've found for CI recently is by Martin Fowler, author of the famous "Enterprise Application Architecture" book.
URL: http://martinfowler.com/articles/continuousIntegration.html
Here are some links that might be useful:
http://www.codeproject.com/KB/dotnet/cruisecontrol_continuous.aspx
http://devlicio.us/blogs/ziemowit_skowronski/archive/2007/03/10/continuous-integration-1-the-environment-and-the-first-build.aspx
http://code.google.com/p/ci-factory/
One tip we have learned - if you have a reasonably large team and the product you're referring to is some "push to QA so people can test" type of scenario, resist the urge to have it build every single time someone checks something in. It will likely take down QA for some amount of time and cause QA to be disrupted a lot before you figure out that people are checking stuff in all day long.
For a "push to QA" scenario, just have it go off every evening if it detects changes.
For a "see if it builds" scenario, once every hour is good (again, people check in stuff way too often on a decent sized team to make instant builds worthwhile)
If you're looking a .NET CI could I suggest you have a look at Team City. I think it's better and it is free for up to 20 users.
Really, the documentation is pretty solid
Related
We have a large collection of nAnt scripts that build our various products. They almost all have the following structure:
Erase old working copy.
Check out complete fresh copy from version control.
Increment build number in appropriate file (custom nAnt task).
Run static analysis (StyleCop, Perl scripts)
Build solution using Visual Studio - ends up with MSI output.
Run unit tests (nUnit, JSUnit)
Run static analysis (FxCop)
Zip up deliverables (MSI, readme, etc) into well-named package.
Put this zip package onto a server share.
Email results to team.
From our research, it seems that CruiseControl(.net?)/Hudson/BuildBot would only add the trigger that causes the build, which at the moment is double-clicking the nAnt script over Remote Desktop and a status dashboard.
Are we missing anything else significant?
The question is subjective, and thus so is my answer.
In the projects I've automated before, CruiseControl was used essentially for that one purpose: so we didn't have to remote into the build machine and trigger builds. The CI part is that CruiseControl will monitor the repository for you, triggering builds at the intervals you define.
It also gave us the dashboard from which could trigger releases, or go back to examine logs and artefacts from past builds.
For us that was enough benefit to implement CruiseControl. Perhaps it doesn't "seem" like much until you've finished it and a month later realized you haven't had to touch your build system because it's off silently and thanklessly doing its thing for you.
A Continuous Integration server such as Hudson would do 1, 2, 3, 9 and 10 for you so that you don't have to implement them yourself. If you've already got it working that's maybe not a huge improvement for your current project but it makes things simpler for subsequent projects. It would also, as you mention, take care of when to trigger the build.
Hudson will also chart various trends over time, such as test coverage, build time, static analysis results. You can also have more sophisticated notifications than just e-mail if you choose.
The most important thing it gives you is visual feedback (the bigger the screen is better). When you have one machine, dedicated to displaying buildresults, visible to all team members, it works like a catalyst to people see that something is wrong and fixes it.
If you have something like that standing in a place where your boss can see it and ask you "Hey Wilkinson, why is this screen red?" will you fix your build faster?
Thay all look the same, you can pick whatever you think fits your needs, just have one setup and running.
I am 'relatively new' to unit-testing and TDD. Only more recently have I completed my first production application that has (at least in theory) 100% code coverage. I have done unit-testing in previous projects as well for some time, but not in true TDD fashion and with good code coverage. It had always been an after-thought. I feel I have a pretty good grasp on it now though.
I'm also trying to train the rest of the team on TDD and unit testing so that we can grow togeather and start moving forward with doing unit testing in all of our applications, and eventually progress to doing full TDD w/ automated builds & continous integration. I posted a thread here regarding my plan of attack / training agenda for comments & critisism.
One of the replies (in fact the highest voted) suggested I first setup infrastructure before I go forward with the training. Unfortunately I have no exposure to this, and googling on the topics is difficult because the pages for CruiseControl.NET / nAnt / etc do not really explain the 'why' we should set this up and the 'how' everything connects togeather.
We are a small shop (about 10 developers) and use almost exclusively microsoft technologies and do our development in VB.NET. We are looking to eventually start using C# but that's for another time. I've been using the MSTest project that comes with VS2008 for my unit tests, and I've been building my apps using Visual Studio, and deploying using MSI setup projects... We also (unfortunately) use VSS for our soure control - but that is also on the chopping block and I'd really like to get rid of it and use subversion.
I know that I need to use CruiseControl.NET for CI, and either nAnt or MSBuild for building the applications. And I probably need a build server to run all these builds. But I just can't find anything that 'connects' the dots and explains how they interact with eachother, what should be on your build server, when you should build with your build server (is it just for deployment builds, or even when you just want to compile the app you're developing after making a small change, on your local environment?). I'm also planning on axing MSTest as I've found it to be buggy and will use nUnit instead.
Can anyone perhaps illuminate this gap I have from 'knowing how to do TDD' to 'setting up the proper infrastructure so the whole team can do it and work togeather'? I do understand what continous integration is, but again, I'm not sure how a build server should be setup and how it connects with everything, and why we need one (e.g. the pitch to management).
thanks very much for your time.
What portion of finalbuilder do I need? It seems there's some overlap with final builder and teamcity. Finalbuilder server seems to be a CI server, so I'm guessing I don't need that. FinalBuilder seems to be a build server - but I thought TeamCity is also a build server... And Automise seems to be a visual windows automation tool, like some kind of development platform for winforms apps...
_I also don't see support for final builder in The Team City Supported Apps Diagram : _
Take a look at a webinar I did a few weeks ago - How To Start Unit Testing Successfully. In that webinar I've talked about tools and unit testing best practices and it was aimed at developers just like you who want to introduce unit testing in their organization.
First order of business you want to put a CI (Continuous Integration) process in place and for that you'll need three tools:
Source control
Build server
Build client/script
I hope you already have some form of source control in place so let's talk about the other two.
Build Server - checks the source control and when it changes (or some other condition met) runs a build script on some client (or same machine) there are several build server available I recommend JetBrain's TeamCity it's easy to install and use (great web interface) and is free for up to 20 developers (that's you).
Build Script - on your build client you want to run a build script that would build your solution and run your unit tests. TeamCity has some basic build & test capabilities but for more advanced options (build installer, documentation etc.) you'll need some script runner at work we use FinalBuilder - it's not free but has very good editor. If you're looking for a free alternative have a look at ANT or NANT - but be prepared to edit a lot of XML.
Other tools - Because an important part of successful unit testing is how easy it is to write and run tests on the developer's machines I suggest you check if there are better IDE's or external tools that would help the developers write & run their unit tests.
At work where we do LOB .NET/MSSQL developement, many projects we have are 2 person or even 1 person projects that have development life cycles of 1-3 months. The developers serve as business analyst/project managers/QA so things get done fast with minimal 'BS time' spent. We do get the bigger projects that can take 6 months and have a team of 5 devs on it, but these are more uncommon.
We're doing a push to initiate everyone doing TDD going forward (my most recent project has full code coverage and was developed solely), and I was doing research on the architecture required to take maximum benefit of it. It seems that most people doing TDD are doing CI, have a build server and are doing automated builds and have some kind of automated client build tool (FinalBuilder or nAnt) etc.
So my questions - I see the obvious benefits on the uncommon large projects where you have 5 people working on the same codebase at once - but will we see much benefit from doing CI on the small 2 man projects? What about on a 1 man project - for those is it just a complete waste since you're really not 'integrating' with anyone? And, how would you pitch CI / automated builds / build server to management?
Having an automated/repeatable build process, and being able to prove that the current build passes all tests and runs in a server environment is worth the effort on any size project IMHO.
I'd pitch it this way: manual builds are manual. Things can get mixed up even on small projects . An automated build solves this problem. The amount of time it takes to set up the build script will be made up many times over during the lifecycle of the application.
As far as CI with test runs etc... goes: It's a constant health check on the quality of the code base. It's good to know as soon as possible when one thing inadvertently breaks another thing.
On a small project, you don't need most of the infrastructure to do CI, especially the build server. What you do need is the tests, the build automation, revision control, and a controlled build environment. You can just as well have your build and test servers be virtual machine images you run on your workstations... just so long as the images are under revision control like the rest of the project.
Right now a project I'm working on has reached a level of complexity that requires more than a few steps (actually its become arcane!) to produce a complete/usable product. And unfortunately we didn't start out with a Continuos Integration mindset, so as you can imagine its kind of painful at times, and at others I can easily waste half a day trying to get a clean/tested build.
Anyways as any HUGE project it consists of many components in many different languages (not only enterprise style Java or C# for example), as well as many graphical, and textual resources. Now the problem is that when I look for Continuos Integration, I always find best practices and techniques that assume one is starting a new project, from the ground up. However this isn't a new project, so I was wondering what are some good resources to proactively start migrating from Arcane Integration towards Continuos Integration :)
Thanks in advance!
Here it is in two simple (hah) steps.
Go for the repeatable build:
Use source control, get all code checked in.
Establish and document all tools used to build (mainly, which compiler version). Have a repeatable deployment and set up process for these tools.
Establish and document clearly any resources which are necessary to build, but are not checked in (third party installations, service packs, etc). Have a repeatable deployment and set up process for these dependencies.
Before commiting to source control, developers must
update their working copy
successfully build
run and pass automated tests
These steps can be done 1 at a time, sort of a path to follow. You'll get benefits at each stage. For example, if you aren't using source control at all, just getting the code into source control (without anything else) is a big step forward. Also, if there are no automated tests, then developers can't run them - but they can still get the prior commits and get the compiler to check their work.
If you can do all of these, you'll get to a nice sane place.
The goals are repeatable build processes and developers that are plugged in to how their changes affect the build and other developers.
Then you can reap the bonuses by establishing higher compliance:
Developers establish a frequent commit habit. Code that is in the working copy should never be more than 1 day old.
Automated build process monitors source control for check-ins and gets the results to a place where the users can accept them (such as a test environment, a preview website, or even simply placing an .exe where the user can find it).
The same way you eat an elephant (one bite at a time) ;-) Continuous integration requires an automated build. Start with that. Automate the building of each piece. Ant or NAnt is a great way to do this. Have each component's construction be a NAnt task. Then your entire system build can aggregate those individual tasks.
From there, you can add tasks for deployment, for unit testing, etc. If you want to use a CI technology, you can wire it up to your NAnt build.
I would start by first writing down all the steps it takes you to do the build and test manually. After that you at least have a guide for doing it the old way, and writing things down gives you the chance to look at it as a complete process.
Then look for parts to script.
Ideally you want to trigger a build and test from a code commit and only rebuild and retest the changed parts, with perhaps a full build and test nightly or weekly. You'll need log files or database entries and reports on the build success or lack of it.
You'll want to search out and evaluate pre-built products and open-source build-your-own kits. You can certainly write all the scripting and reporting yourself, but it will take a while and you'll probably end up with a just barely good enough reporting system since your job is coding the product, not coding the build system. :-)
I would guess that migrating isn't really an option--Half-ass solutions will only make it worse.
My approach would be to take one creative engineer who understands the build process, sit him down and say "Fix this". Give him a week or two.
The end goal would be a process that runs beginning to end with a single make command.
I also recommend an automated "Setup" procedure where you simply do a checkout and run a batch file from a network share to install and build all your tools. The amount of time this will save overall is staggering if you bring in new programmers. Most projects take one to three days to get set up on a new computer--and it's always the "new" programmer who doesn't know what's going on doing the installs on his own system...
In short: Incrementally
Choose a framework that will work across the diverse range of projects.
One by one, add components to the framework.
If you are not familiar with the framework, tackle a couple of the easier components first, to reduce risk of screwing up.
If you do understand the framework, tackle some of the more difficult and/or commonly built components first, so your team (and management) will appreciate the benefits early, and support the effort more.
Be sure to have a plan to include all of your components, because that's when the full benefit will be realized.
Bring your team with you; make sure you have consensus that this is going to be valuable, or people won't maintain it as the components change.
I have a few Visual Studio Solutions/Projects that are being worked on in my company, which now require a scheme for automatic nightly builds. Such a scheme needs to be able to check the latest versions from SVN, build the solutions, create the appropriate downloadable files (including installers, documentation, etc.), send e-mails to the developers upon errors and all sorts of other nifty things. What tool, or tool-set, should I use for this?
I used to use FinalBuilder a few years ago and I liked that a lot but I'm not sure if they support such features as nightly-builds and email messages.
At my work we use CCNET, but with builds on check-in more than nightly - although it's easily configured for either or both.
You can very easily set up unit testing to run on every checkin as well, FXCop testing, and a slew of other products.
I would also advise checking out Team City as an option, because it has a free version, and the reporting and setup is reportedly much simpler (it does look nice to me). It does have a limit of somewhere around 20 team members/projects, before it hits a pay-for window.
That said, we started with CCNET, and have grown several products too large to look at Team City on the free version and are very happy with what we have.
Features that help with CCNET include:
XML based configuration - you can usually copy and paste most of what you need.
More or less you'll be able to plug your treesurgeon script in as your build script, and point CCNET at that as an executable task to run the compilation.
Lots of documentation and very easy to set up nunit, ncover, fxcop, etc.
Taskbar app that will let you know the status of your projects at any time, and it can also fire off an email or keep an RSS feed with the same information.
But I'd definitely go with running a CI build on every check-in - for the most part will run the unit tests before checking in, but let the CCNET server handle run any applications/assemblies that would have dependencies on the assembly we're checking in, and they get re-built, and re-tested on every checkin.
Given that CCNET is free free and takes very little time to set up - I'd highly recommend just going for it and seeing if it suits you, then expanding from there.
(There's another thread here where I posted pretty much the same/with a few alterations - but some of the other comments may help too! Automated Builds)
Edit to add: You can easily set up your own deployment scheme for CCNET, and there are a tonne of blog posts out there to assist, and email notifications can really be set up fairly granularly, either on all successes, all failures, when it changes from success to fail, etc. There's also built in RSS, and you could even set up your own notifiers for other systems.
FinalBuilder does support emailing and just executing FinalBuilder each night will give you nightly builds. You don't really need other software for that if you don't want to.
You could also use CCNet to trigger a build when needed and have it execute FinalBuilder for the build. You can then decide if FinalBuilder or CCNet should email.
Finally FinalBuilder has a Server version which is sorta like CCNet in that it is a continues integration tool using FinalBuilder. See http://www.finalbuilder.com/finalbuilder-server.aspx
Of course the biggest advantage of CCNet is that it is free and open source.
Although it costs, I highly recommend Visual Build. It works with MSBuild, and old tools like Visual Basic. It is scriptable, and can do everything from making installers to simple Continuous Integration.
We just started using Hudson here at the office.
Its free and open-source, it has a very user friendly UI. Plus there are tons of options and plugins available.
I was up and running in a matter of minutes after installing it. All the other devs here are loving it.
All in all, its a very elegant solution for Continuous Integration or Nightly Builds.
I've recently started using CruiseControl.NET (http://confluence.public.thoughtworks.org/display/CCNET/Welcome+to+CruiseControl.NET). It works reasonably well, although configuration could be easier. CruiseControl.NET is free and open source, and seems to integrate with most standard tools, although I've personally only used it with CVS, SVN, NUnit and MSBuild.
Luntbuild
Supports a wide variety of source control and build systems. Very customizable. Open Source. Setup takes some time, but it's not too horrible.
Buildbot is open source and very powerful too. You should take a look at it.
Cascade supports doing a build on every single change committed to the repository.
I would not recommend doing only nightly builds -- that's a pretty long window where a build break can slip in before it's reported.