We are moving to TFS 2010 (from PVCS) for source control and work item tracking
As I understand it you should have under source control for each TFS project everything that projects solutions, etc. need to build.
This OK for new .NET solutions/projects, but we have a large collection of legacy Delphi 6 projects with shared source libraries we want to port into TFS for source control and build. It is how we manage multiple TFS projects that want to sare a specific set of source files between them that is my problem here.
Historically with PVCS we have had projects for each solution (say A & B), and a seperate project for common source code (say C). Users would get C then get either A or B (checking out as required) on disk this would maifest as something like this:
$\Projects\C
$\Projects\B
But B & C are seperate PVCS archives.
Now fast forward to life with TFS 2010 as our ALM solution...
If we create a TFS project (1) that contains the source repository for the common code (C), that projecs can obviously access it (lets say the TFS project also contains the solution A) and all is good.
We now create a new TFS project (2) in which to make solution B. Beacuse solution B is wildy different to solution A we had no reason to share TFS project 1's source control so we made a new source repository rather than branching from 1. Now later on we discover a need for solution B to access some common files from C (in 1). Oops!
The question is this; can I perform some source control wizzardry that lets me add a folder in the 2's soruce control that is a (to steal a file system term) symbolic link into 1's source control for the common code C?
Edit
I should point out this is all legacy code and the shared source library (C) is just that shared source it does not build into a library or other binary we could simply add to A or B.
In TFS 2010, as you may know, they introduced the concept of a project collection (PC). Each project collection is an aggregate for team projects (TP). Each PC is stored in a separate database, and the VCS is stored in the database.
This means that there is one VCS repository per PC, not TP. Each TP is (by default) the root folder in each VCS (i.e. TP1 will be at $/Prj1, TP2 might be at 4/Prj2, etc.)
One more point is that you do not want to have one solution per TP. Think of a TP as a suite of products, and a solution as a part of that.
Symbolic links, as per Visual Source Safe, no longer exist in TFS, and I'm not sure you need them. It is not considered a good practice to create a dependency between one solution and the source code of another solution.
What I suggest you do, is have each solution in your codebase depend only on its own code, and on other solutions' binary deliveries.
What will happen is that if Sln_A depends on Common_Sln, you will build Common_Sln, and bring its binaries from the drop location as part of your Get. Then, add the binaries as references.
This will solve your problem, with the added benefit of transforming a tight coupling where a dependency may break your dependent solution's build, into a situation where you do not change or upgrade your dependencies until they are ready and you are ready for them.
Does this help solve your problem? This is how I do this with the projects I consult on.
HTH,
Assaf.
Related
We are trying to move from our current source control to a TFS as a source control. Right now we have all projects as project references. Our organization is small and we have a lot of common projects that are used by various development teams and all teams update these projects as needed. When we migrate to TFS we are looking to use DLL references for these projects but I am wondering if that would make branching impossible and I am also concerned about is there a benefit of having DLL references to the projects that all teams in the company need to make changes to.
Could you please suggest, given our scenario, if it would be good idea to have DLL references to our common projects or to have project references. Any links to suggested readings would also be helpful.
Depends on the size of these projects and how often you make changes there, dll references are generaly used for 3rd party libs, if you own common projects are not often changed and/or changed by small/dedicated group of ppl then it may be benificial to treat them the same way, otherwise its better to have project references.
Im not sure why dll references would present branching problems ? You branch them just like any other code or project, if they dont differ per branch you can save yourself time on updates and keep them outside branch in single location.
Using TFS 2010 I need to build a solution that depends on a couple of other solutions held in different team projects. I'm editing my build definition and I create a list of "Projects to Build'. When it comes to build the parent solution I get an error because it's unable to reference assemblies created by the other solutions. So I go back to edit build definition and add /p:ReferencePath="c:\builds\3\referencedproject\binaries\" to the "MSBuild Arguments" Build process parameters.
Problem is, I don't want to hard code the c:\build\3. I guess there may be a $() property I can use in its place - can anyone please advise?
The other problem I have is that the 'Main' project and the two other projects that it references live at the same level in the source code. As far as I can tell, I have to set the source control folder to be the level above this - which happens to be the root. This means that TFS Build does a get of all the projects on the root - which includes dozens of projects that are not required for my build. It's not a critical issue since it makes no attempt to compile these non-related projects but it does increase the time for the build cycle to complete. Is this only way to avoid this to "group" the projects that are required for my build into a different TFS source folder?
For the references issue there are a few options. The most common one taking an explicit dependency on a specific version by checking in the binary to TFS.
For example, if you have Team Project A that has a dependency on Team Project B, I would assume they are setup as separate projects because they evolve differently, probably have different teams working on them, and have different release cycles. The common approach to managing this dependency is to checkin B.dll into Team Project A (usually in a lib folder specifically for this purpose), then use a file reference from within Project A's solution/projects to the dll in the lib folder.
This approach lets the Project A team explicitly choose which version of B.dll they wish to depend on, and make an explicit decision to adopt newer versions of B.dll on their own timetable.
For the other question of how to have a build definition download only select source code paths, you can specify multiple lines in the Workspace mapping screen when setting up a build definition. For example you could have the following:
$\ProjectA -> $(SourceDir)\ProjectA
$\ProjectB -> $(SourceDir)\ProjectB
This would download Project A + B but not C.
I'll start with problem 2 as this should be easiest to solve.
You have 2 options both involve changing the workspace mapping of your Build Definition.
You don't have to map at the folder "above", you can map individual folders so if your source looks like this.
$/TP/SolutionA
$/TP/Folder1/SolutionB
$/TP/Folder1/SolutionC
$/TP/Folder2/SolutionD
and you only want to include SolutionA and SolutionC in your build, you could set the workspace up as follows.
This will get just the code you need and preserve the relative paths between them.
Another option is to use cloaking, you map the "Root" folder and then cloak any folders you want the build to ignore.
Both of these methods will restrict the amount of source being downloaded when the build runs, and also prevent "continuous" builds from starting when checkins occur in the folders that haven't been mapped / Cloaked.
Problem number 1.
As Dylan suggests, probably the best thing to do is to use Binary References between solutions. Especially solutions in seperate team projects.
Check out my answer to this question for a full description.
I'm a Fossil (and CVS configuration) novice attempting to create and manage a set of distributed Fossil repositories for a Delphi project.
I have the following directory tree on my development machine:
Projects
Some Project
Delphi Components
LookupListView
Some Client
Some Project For Client
Some Other Project For Client
Source Code
Project Resources
Project Database
I am setting up Fossil version control in order to version and share Projects\Some Client\Some Other Project For Client\Source Code, which contains Delphi 2010 source for a database project.
This project makes use of Projects\Delphi Components\LookupListView which is a Delphi component. I need this code to be included in the versioning system for my project. I will, in theory, need to include it in other Fossil repositories in the future, as well.
If I create my Fossil repository at the Source Code or Some Other Project For Client level, I cannot add any code above that level to my repository. What is the proper way to deal with this? The two solutions that occur to me are
1) Creating a separate repository for LookupListView and make sure that everyone who uses a repository for a project that references it "knows" that they must also get the current version of this project as well. This seems to defeat the purpose of being able to obtain a complete, current version of the project with a single checkout. The problem is magnified because there are other common component dependencies in this project.
2) Establishing my Fossil repository in the Projects directory, so I can check in files from various subfolders. This seems to me to involve an awful lot of extra path-typing when doing adds, and also to impose my directory structure (Some Client\Some Other Project For Client\Source) on the other users of the repository -- in this case, the actual client.
Any suggestions appreciated.
I use Git, but my approach can be applied in your situation.
I have one repository for all my components folder. This gives me an ability to get all of them with only few console commands (in case when I reinstall my OS or go to another computer etc.).
Also I have one repository per each of my projects. If some project uses 3rd party controls I create "components" sub-folder and do symbolic links (junctions) of every components set.
This approach have some disadvantages (when you "go back" in commits history of some project, components can be modified too. And if many projects are using same components this could cause some troubles). But I had no issues yet :)
TFS 2008 and Common Libraries
I have created a Team Project called "Common Library" that will host code used in numerous different Team Projects throughout TFS. For sake of argument, lets say we have 2 distinct Librarys under the "Common Library" Team Projects, MailProject and LoggingProject. Other projects throughout TFS will be using the binary representation of these projects via branching and not the actual source code.
What is the best way to set up the folder structure for this Team Project? Do I add the project to the "Common Library" and simply "include" the bin/release folder as part of the project?
I have seen some examples of people creating a seperate "Deploy" folder. I assume this is synonamous with the bin/release folder?
We do not want the source code available in other solutions.
Currently, each project has the dll included in the project. Using a mailing module as an example, many projects need the ability to mail. The common module is very stable and mostly static.
However, what if there is a change in the mail module. It seems there would be a better way, than to check out each project and update the dll. Is it possible to allow TFS to grab the latest mail module any time a 'get latest' is called? Either explicitly or implicitly.
Unless you really require the source code for the libraries to be available in the other solutions my advice would be to include the binaries for the libraries in the projects that would use them not really having any explicit link between the two in TFS. Custom labelling of the library builds could be helpful to easily return and rebuild any chosen version of the shared libraries.
If the shared libraries require different versions for different projects then the obvious solution would to create a separate branch for every version of the libraries that need to be customised to a particular project.
TFS does not have a concept similar to SVN's 'externals' though - so if you include a branch from the shared libraries in a project and than branch that project it is very difficult to propagate changes correctly.
I suppose you could also use the Get task in the build and get the latest version of DDLs into the current project from another one, but verify if you can point of Workspace of another project (I have not tired it and MSDN is somewhat vague here). You might need to have a separate workspace for the shared project.
Yet another alternative would be to publish the DLLs for common components to a known location on every build of the shared libs and for individual builds to get whatever version is available from that common location (network share) even via the Copy task. This is simplistic and may cause problems with versioning of the common components but should work well enough in simple case.
We are using TFS 2008 for Web App dev. The WebApp is a large project, so we do not want every developer to see all the source code, which means lots of libraries or subapps need to be referenced.If I put all the libraries and subapps in one VS2008 Project or VS2008 Team Project, all the source codes will be exposed to each person.
Do I have to make the WebApp reference other Team Project to solve this problem? What is the best way doing so?
Consider each isolated section to be a project (in both the physical and management sense) as independent. Ship release from those shared components/projects and deliver them as binaries to be pulled into the others. You can use a the output from trunk or release branch builds of the shared components to deliver new "releases".
This affords you the option of full branching, work item, reporting etc for each logical project in your organization.
If you let someone be a contributor/developer on a project, then that individual has access to the entire project. If you want to keep someone out of the certain files, then that will need to be under its own TFS project. You would then reference the output assemblies from the parent project in the child project.