I got two solution setting at same location. This two solution are sharing some of the projects along with some dedicated ones.
I have created two separate build definition with gated check in trigger but issue is that when I make any change in one solution it triggers both the build definition.
Can I somehow control the triggering of the build definition based on the solution that I am checking in?
You need to configure your workspace correctly for this to work. Any change in a Build definition's mapped workspace will cause a build to trigger. Due to this, it completely depends on your source control layout, whether it's possible to setup a build that only triggers when something changes that belongs to either solution.
This setup will become very hard to manage quite quickly, as such I recommend you put each set of projects in their own subfolder, that makes it a lot easier.
So ensure that you build definitions won't both trigger, open the Source Settings panel of your build definition and apply a cloak rule to each file or folder by changing "active" in the first column to "cloaked".
To cloak a file you need to enter its full path in TFS, the UI will only offer you a folder picker, but entering a path to a file will work.
These files should:
Not be needed to build the solution
and changes to should not trigger the build.
Do note that the cloak will cause Team Build to not get these files on the Build agent, so it's not possible to have files your build depends on, but not trigger the build when these files change.
You should create gated check-in build definitions per project not per solution.
Related
I am new to using Azure DevOps builds/pipelines, as the source code for the solutions I need to build are in TFVC I am limited to using the Classic (i.e. UI) builds rather than YAML.
When I want to test changes to a build definition I sometimes want to run a clean build, i.e. ensure that sources and artifacts from earlier builds are removed before the new build run, yet leave normal builds (i.e. ones triggered by changes in TFVC) to be incremental so to make builds faster.
I am used to TeamCity which has a plethora of options with regards to managing source and artifacts retention between builds, including a simple "clean" check box when triggering a manual build.
ADO Builds seems very limited in this regards and if I want to have a clean build it seems the only option is to change the build definition, select clean, run the build, then change the build definition again to remove the clean option.
Are there better ways to manage "ad-hoc" clean sources and artifacts in ADO Builds?
Those settings are either on/off. They wouldn't accept conditional run-time variables.
That being said, you might try leveraging the "Save as draft" option. It seems to create a DRAFT pipeline definition you could execute for your changes.
You could probably just flip it back to no clean before publishing. I don't really use that feature, but I am going to guess on the back-end it is using a different temporary definition id. That will probably mean on the build agent a new folder gets created under _work. If that is the case, you probably wouldn't even need to flip the clean sources since it will not exist the first run. It also probably means if this a self-hosted agent you will have doubled the work folder size and you might have to manage that clean-up after you are done.
If it does create the second work folder, this is probably preferable as it means you won't break the incremental build on the build directly following your test with clean. Whether you did that ad-hoc or through editing the build definition.
Build.Clean variable is deprecated, you can only use Clean option to clean local repo on the agent currently.
I'd like suggest you submit a user voice at website below, product team will evaluate it carefully:
https://developercommunity.visualstudio.com/content/idea/post.html?space=21
One workaround is adding a Post Build Cleanup task in the end of your pipeline, when you want to run builds incrementally, you can disable this task.
First attempt at automated build and continuous deployment so any process suggestions / improvements are welcome.
I have a repository with different build definitions. One for each of the following: database project, api, and web. (Will add more later for etl / reports) Each build has a filter so it only builds if code in a specific path has been changed.
Currently I have separate releases using continuous deployment for each build. So when the code changes, it builds that auto deploys. This works, but really isn't practical because of dependencies.
What I am looking to do is have one release definition that includes all build artifacts. Then have deployment phases that only run conditionally if a specific build artifact was created (something in that project changed). This way all builds / releases don't run every time, but are tied together when there are related changes.
I am going down the path of trying to created a custom condition on the deployment phase, but can't seem to figure out a way to make this work. I appreciate any help with this.
I have a repository with different build definitions. One for each of
the following: database project, api, and web. (Will add more later
for etl / reports) Each build has a filter so it only builds if code
in a specific path has been changed
Path filters are not to be used in your situation.
If you see Microsoft's git repo,
They have all their codebase from the Windows and Devices Group (WDG) in one big repo. Each root folder is a separate product and completely unrelated to the rest. (eg. Xbox, HoloLens, Windows OS, etc).
Path filters makes sense here because if I git push code to Xbox, I don't want Hololens code also to be built.
Web / DB / API projects all need to be built together, packaged together and deployed together.
I am assuming the project uses .NET stack.
Keep the DB, Web and API projects are in the same solution. Create a single build definition that builds the solution and create multiple artifacts(dacpac, webdeploy package etc.) by adding multiple publish artifacts step.
See screenshot of a build with multiple artifacts.
Link the artifacts from this build to the Release Definition and you should be able to deploy.
I'm using TFS 2017, and regarding to title I found a term: Incremental build - but, I can not find out where to set it. I tried to add Incremental parameter in ' build parameters' (/p:IncrementalBuild=true) but always got error which says that this is wrong parameter.
Is possible to deliver (or build and deliver) only changed files?
Lets assume how I solved this problem (if anyone has similar problem):
Since TFS 2017 always delivered all files - changed and unchanged, but I need only changed, I solved this as follows:
Since files that are transferred to Artifact keep timestamp (unchanged files have last_edited timestamp, and edited files have new, current timestamp) I decide to create FIXED Artifact directory (not depending on build version, but always the same). Then I wrote PowerShell script (as a first Release step ) which deletes all files (recursive) which have timestamp that is < (Now - x min), and all empty directories after that.
On this way Artifact directory contains of ONLY CHANGED files (entire file structure (of changed files) is kept). Now Release will deliver only these files to destination.
Cheers! :)
If you want to have an incremental build. When you add a Visual Studio Build / MSBuild task to build the project, just uncheck the Clean option. Thus it will sync the source and only get the changed files from the second time to build. See
Build task Arguments for details.
Clean Option : Set to False if you want to make this an incremental build. This setting might reduce your build time,
especially if your codebase is large. This option has no practical
effect unless you also set Clean repository to False.
Set to True if you want to rebuild all the code in the code projects.
This is equivalent to the MSBuild /target:clean argument.
Assuming you want to deliver the only changed files to a specific location, you can add a Copy Files step to copy the changed files to the location.
I am using TeamCity and I am new to it. I have added a Build Configuration to the TeamCity and I created one VCS root to attach to it.
However, my project have a special requirement to detect a particular file that was changed in the VCS root location and use that file in build step. I am sure this could be done in TeamCity, I am not able to figure out how.
Any help? Thanks,
To get the names of the files changed this is what I did. Thanks to Sam Jones.
I used System.TeamCity.build.changedFiles.file variable as follows.
Add a command line build step
Select Run as Custom Script
Add the script copy "%system.teamcity.build.changedFiles.file%" changelog.txt in script box.
You will get the changes in changelog.txt file in the format specified on this link.
NOTE: teamcity.build.changedFiles.file does not work. You need to use system.teamcity.build.changedFiles.file
It sounds like you want a VCS Trigger that specifies VCS Trigger Rules, so that a build configuration will run when someone makes a change to a particular file. The documentation has some nice examples of how to do this. If you're trying to trigger a build on one particular file, try this:
+:foo/bar.txt
This excludes all files from the trigger rule and then includes bar.txt in the foo directory. Paths are relative to the root of the repository (do not include a preceding slash). If someone modifies foo/bar.txt, the build configuration will be triggered to run.
VCS Trigger Rules also support pattern matching and all sorts of other options. Check out the documentation.
I'm trying to get continuous integration working using Hudson, Maven & Perforce (with an scm poll used to trigger each build)
One of the requirements is to automatically update POM snapshot version numbers following each successful build.
This is trivial using the Maven release plugin, but the act of checking in the newly versioned POMs triggers another build - which continues ad infinitum.
Is there any way of checking in version updates without triggering another build? There doesn't seem to be any way of excluding specific user checkins, specific changelists, or specific files when the scm poll makes the decision to rebuild.
This seems like a basic requirement - been doing it for years using Cruise Control / Ant / Perforce,
Cheers,
Mark
I have been contemplating a move to Hudson, but the inability to exclude specific files from the scm poll would be a deal breaker. Did you also ask this question on the Hudson mailing list?
users <at> hudson <dot> dev <dot> java <dot> net
The only workaround I can see from reading through the docs seems to be triggering builds based on p4 triggers, where you could then programmatically do whatever you want, but that doesn't seem to be a very simple approach.
I don't believe there is any way to configure Hudson to omit part of a Perforce workspace when polling. You may have better luck by setting up two different workspaces - one for build test using a default POM and one for your releases with the auto-updated release POM. The two workspaces could differ on just this one file and modifying the release POM would not trigger a new build.
Check out how to do individual file mapping in a workspace in the P4Guide.
Its possible to update the description of a changelist after it has been submitted, so if you build to a certain changelist number you can then update the description of that changelist to include your build number. This shouldnt trigger a new build.
What is "POM"?
You can have Hudson "Create or Update Label in Perforce" (see near the bottom of your project's configuration.) You could use that along with the BUILD_NUMBER environment variable that Hudson provides, giving you unique build numbers and stamped P4 labels of said build.
I have all tagging, ChangeLog updates, and packaging done by our checked in build code. This allows us to:
Create RC and appropriate tags without starting anther build
Allows us to debug all aspects of our build on any dev machine, not just those with Hudson.
Allows us to exactly recreate how a package, tag, etc was done in at any point in the past.
I had a similar problem checking in compiled src. I was able to find an alternative but i did consider the following.
In hudson specify a child folder of your project to poll. I.e. don't actually have hudson check out your project, just an incidental folder.
Add a shell script to check out your project proper.
Run you normal scripts.
check in your pom. The trick here is that the folder being polled won[t have changed at this point.
Not ideal, but works.
The perforce plugin has had polling masks for a while now. It's in the Advanced section under "View Mask".
Basically, you list a subset of files that you want polling to check for changes. Unfortunately there's no easy way to exclude files, so you'll have to create a list of file specs that specify everything BUT the file you want to exclude. So if the version is contained in a pom.xml, I would need to specify the files and directories that don't contain it.
For example, if your directory structure looked like this:
./pom.xml
./lib/
./src/
You would specify,
//depot/project/lib/...
//depot/project/src/...
as the view mask, and check the checkbox to use it only for polling. There are a few limitations with this feature, such as not being able to use '-' to exclude file specs, but it's still a workable solution for now.