My scenario is as follows:
Developers check-in SQL changes to directory ClientDB
A dedicated build wakes up, extracts the metadata from the checked-in files, processes it and checks the result in into a sibling directory ClientMetadata
(Developers are not allowed to check-in under ClientMetadata)
The annoying side effect, is that because the dedicated build is a CI build it wakes up twice:
Once for the changes in ClientDB, which makes it update ClientMetadata
Second time, because of its own changes in the ClientMetadata - after all, this directory appears as an Active directory in the Source Settings section of the build:
Ideally, I would like the ClientMetadata directory to be available in the workspace, but I do not want changes there to trigger the build.
Is it possible?
If the 2nd checkin from the build is done with a checkin comment that has the text ***NO_CI*** at the end, the continuous integration trigger will be suppressed.
It's a hack, but it's how gated checkins work OOTB with TFS.
What does ***NO_CI*** stand for?
Not with XAML build. It's absolutely possible in the build system introduced in TFS 2015.
When you select this trigger (CI) whenever someone checks in code, the build will run.
Actually check in files to source control during a build pipeline is not a recommended suggestion.
If you don't want to cloaked the ClientMetadata folder and still want this be pulled down on build agent during get source. Please try below workaround:
You could remove the active status for this folder and add a customize activity to only get files from TFS server path($/../../ClientMetadata) to the agent $(BuildDir).
Related
I'm trying to get a VCS trigger to work in TeamCity with TFS but no matter what I do, I can't get it to trigger on a checkin
I've defined the VCS trigger as +:fodl/FODL.Database.InvestmentDataMart.APTExtract/**
..which I believe should only trigger a build if changes are detected in that directory but none of the pending changes every seem to trigger a build
Here's a screenshot of my build trigger:-
And a screenshot of my build source directory where all files have been checked out to:-
Does anyone know what I'm doing wrong? I can't use checkout rules to target just the FODL.Database.InvestmentDataMart.APTExtract folder as all the solution files all live in the base directory above it (FODL)
Try +:**/fodl/FODL.Database.InvestmentDataMart.APTExtract/**. If the disconnect is "where I think the root directory is" versus "where TC thinks the root directory is", the prepended wildcard should fix it.
I am not sure if this is obvious or not, but the VCS trigger only let's you control if the build will run and what rules will trigger the build. The VCS trigger does not do anything if TeamCity is not aware of the change in the source control repository. For that you need to either
Define a scheduled trigger that will change for changes in your source repository.
Or configure TFS to notify TeamCity (through web hooks or other kind of integration) that there is a change.
I have two build definition "A" and "B". I marked "A" to be triggered (Gated Check-in) when the check in include files under "src\ProjectA" and "B" to be triggered when the check in include files under "src\ProjectB".
It's working as expected when the chech-in include only one of the folders.
When the check-in include both of the folder and I click the CkeckIn button in Visual Studio I have to select which build I want to run (I choose "A") and only this build running and all the files are getting in, meaning that some code get into the repository that can break the build that didn't run ("B").
How can I make TFS run both builds whenever such a checkin will be delivered and not accept the change if all of the depended build get passed?
Each gated check-in build definition can have only one running build at a time. If you have two build definitions configured for the same source control folder then you will always get a choice. Your situation is very likely configured for the same source control folder.
It is recommended to have only check in each Project fold instead of check in include both of the folder together to avoid confusion. As a workaround you could first check in files in folder src\ProjectA and then exclude others, after the gated check-in build completed, include other files again.
For more info of the TFVC gated check-in, you could take a look at James Reed's answer in this question Can we build multiple gated check-ins in parallel?
Our builds generally have a mish mash of work items and commits associated with them and I cannot tell how TFS determines what to add. We are using TFS 2015 update 3 and TFVC.
When a build runs, it gets code from a location somewhere in the branching and folder of TFVC. Typically, something like "root\dev\src\component name" in this way we avoid getting all of the code in our repository and we have CI set up to run so that any changes in this folder will result in a CI build running.
We also run daily builds which run more tests and create a release package that is used by TFS Release Management. I would expect that any changes to code inside of the folder defined in setting up the repository for this build to be included in the associated change-sets of a build. I also expect that any changes checked-in outside of these branches would not be associated. But this is not the case. We see commits from across the entire project.
Does anyone know how this is supposed to work?
I am not sure if this should go in the question or the answer but I have found some additional information, thanks to the hints provided in the answers below.
It appears that the source settings will take the common root between mapped folders of the repository settings, so if I have 2 folders $/Relo/Dev/B1/src/Claims.Services and $/Relo/Dev/B1/src/PSScripts it will take the common root $/Relo/Dev/B1/src as the source settings and include any changes from that folder down within the build. Can anyone confirm this? Of course thats not what I want to have happen. In the History tab of the build definition if I looked at the diff I can see a field "defaultBranch" in the json which seems to be the value that controls this, is there any way to update this field directly?
TFS determines what changesets should be mapped to a build based on the Source Repository Mappings (Build vNext) in the build definition and the last successful build.
So, you will see a list of the changesets with files committed in the lowest common base of any of the mapped folders including all their descendents, since the latest successful build. Whenever you get a successful build (I hope that it happens more often than failing ones ;-)) the list will shorten and only show the last check-in.
Example mappings below will result in any changeset made to anything below $/Relo/Dev/B1/src (because it is the lowest common base):
$/Relo/Dev/B1/src/Claims.Services
$/Relo/Dev/B1/src/PSScripts
Similar it will pick up all the related work items to the above changesets.
This is what should happen. If you see something else, I would have a closer look at the Repository Mappings or Source Settings of the build definition.
#Noel - I guess you are using vNext build and not XAML builds. Or are you using a mix of XAML and vNext?
In general a scheduled TFS build will associate all changes which were not associated in the last successful run of the same build.
I suggest you check once again if the source folder locations are the same for CI build and Daily build?
Is it possible programmatically to on a Gated -Check in build in TFS 2010 to not trigger a Gated Build when checking in a specific file type, i.e. ".config"? How can I accomplish that?
Not that I know of, you can only configure the workspace mappings which controls when the build triggers. so you can include or cloak folders, but not file types.
Presumably you don't want to run the Gated Build because a config file won't affect the build. But still running the build anyways shouldn't really hurt anything, you just waste a little bit of resources on your build server.
If it's really a concern, you can customize the build template, to look at what files are in the linked changeset (using a custom activity and the TFS API probably), and if it's just config files abort the build (with a successful result).
I would go down the route of seeing what messages TFS processes when performing a gated checkin. It might be possible to some how write a TFS server side plugin to hook the event, inspect the changeset and stop the build while allowing the shelf set to commit.
You are swimming pretty far out of Microsofts swim lane on this one so I'm not sure how much work and what the side effects would be on this one.
FWIW, I would want the build to run even on a config file change because I always want to be able to deploy the latest build and see the state of my project.
Is there a way to avoid the automated build when we checkin only js or css files?
It doesn't need to build anything, I would like to skip the build for these files.
I don't think it is possible to do what you are wanting to do- I don't think gated check-ins is that mature yet. There are quite a few outstanding enhancement requests for gated check-ins. It might be worth adding this as a request. Even cloaked folders are at the folder level and not the file level.
From MSDN:
Automatically Run Gated Check-in
Builds
A gated check-in build is run
automatically when either of the
following events occur:
A build has been defined with the Gated Check-in check box selected on
the Trigger tab of the build
definition.
Someone attempts to check in one or more changes that intersect with
any of the mapped folders in the
Workspace tab of the build definition.
Even if you add a ***NO_CI*** tag and try to checkin, it will stll fire the check to build changes.
The obvious workaround is of course to check the checkbox ignoring the need to do a build (a path I am sure you are trying to avoid).
If we take a look at the UI around editing a build definition, there aren't optional parameters for rules etcetera. All that matters is the mapped folders.
You can however set specific folders to not build by cloaking a workspace folder. However, if you do that, it will not pick up those files for builds at all. So if you had all your JS files in one folder and excluded it from the build using the cloaked approach builds would fail when you actually wanted to run the build.