TFS 2010 API - Get work items from merge - version-control

I need to send an email on completion of a build in TFS 2010 which details the work items associated with check-ins that have been compiled as part of this build. This works no problem via use of the associatedChangesets variable available in the build workflow.
However, in a production situation, we will merge changes from our Development branch into a Release branch. At this point, the build considers there to have only been one change - which is the aforementioned merging of Development into Release. Obviously this is fairly useless as we need to find out which changes where made in the branch that was merged in, and the work items associated.
Does anyone know how to accomplish this using the TFS 2010 API? It seems to be fairly poorly documented from an API perspective. I know you can expand the merge history node in VS2010 but obviously this is no good as this data needs to be collected programatically so a report email can be sent.

OK... I think I found a solution to this although it's clunky and truth be told I'm not exactly sure how it works. But here goes - maybe it will point someone in the right direction.
var associatedWorkItems = new List<WorkItem>();
//Passed in from the build workflow (this variable is available under the 'Run On Agent' sequence as 'associatedChangesets'
IList<Changeset> associatedChangesets = context.GetValue(BuildAssociatedChangesets);
if (associatedChangesets.Count > 0)
{
var projectCollection =
new TfsTeamProjectCollection(new Uri("http://localhost:8080/tfs/DefaultCollection"));
VersionControlServer versionControlServer = projectCollection.GetService<VersionControlServer>();
foreach (var changeset in associatedChangesets)
{
//In order to view the individual changes, load the changeset directly from the VCS.
Changeset localChangeset = versionControlServer.GetChangeset(changeset.ChangesetId);
foreach (Change change in localChangeset.Changes)
{
//Find out what was merged in.
ChangesetMerge[] mergedChangesets = versionControlServer.QueryMerges(
null,
null,
change.Item.ServerItem,
new ChangesetVersionSpec(localChangeset.ChangesetId),
new ChangesetVersionSpec(localChangeset.ChangesetId),
null,
RecursionType.Full);
//Extract work item information from changesets being identified as merged.
foreach (var changesetMerge in mergedChangesets)
{
Changeset actualChange = versionControlServer.GetChangeset(changesetMerge.SourceVersion);
foreach (WorkItem item in actualChange.WorkItems)
{
if (!associatedWorkItems.Exists(w => w.Id == item.Id))
{
associatedWorkItems.Add(item);
}
}
}
}
}
}
Don't ask me exactly how QueryMerges works but all I'm doing here it saying show me what what merged as a part of a changeset checked in. You'll notice that the parameters ChangesetVersionSpec are the same - this means we're just looking at merges from this one changeset.
You'll get back an array of ChangesetMerge objects from QueryMerges(). In the ChangesetMerge class there is a property called SourceVersion - this is the ChangesetId of the original changeset merged in. Once we've got that we can use the VersionControlServer.GetChangeset() method to load the individual set and extract the WorkItem. This is then added to a list of WorkItems which can be manipulated in any way you want (in my case an email). I also used the .Exists() check to make sure the same WorkItem doesn't get recorded twice.
Note that even though you have the collection associatedChangesets from the build workflow, for some reason (for me at least), the Changes[] property inside associatedChangesets was never populated (hence loading each individual changeset using the VersionControlServer.GetChangeset() method as this seems to actually populate all the fields we need.
Like I say, 1. this is a clunky solution (lots of looping - some of which is probably unecessary), 2. I don't fully understand how this works although it seems to produce the required results - I came to this conclusion by doing a lot testing and debugging) and finally - it's the best I could come up with based on the woeful documentation provided by Microsoft.
Hope it helps someone!

Related

Moving Wagtail pages in a migration

I'm restructuring my Wagtail app to remove an IndexPage that only has a single item in it, and moving that item to be a child of the current IndexPage's parent.
basically moving from this:
Page--|
|--IndexPage--|
|--ChildPages (there's only ever 1 of these)
to this:
Page--|
|--ChildPage
I've made the changes to the models so that this structure is used for creating new content and fixed the relevant views to point to the ChildPage directly. But now I want to migrate the current data to the new structure and I'm not sure how to go about it... Ideally this would be done in a migration so that we would not have to do any of this manipulation by hand.
Is there a way to move these ChildPage's up the tree programmatically during a migration?
Unfortunately there's a hard limitation that (probably) rules out the possibility of doing page tree adjustments within migrations: tree operations such as inserting, moving and deleting pages are implemented as methods on the Page model, and within a migration you only have access to a 'dummy' version of that model, which only gives you access to the database fields and basic ORM methods, not those custom methods.
(You might be able to work around this by putting from wagtail.wagtailcore.models import Page in your migration and using that instead of the standard Page = apps.get_model("wagtailcore", "Page") approach, but I wouldn't recommend that - it's liable to break if the migration is run at a point in the migration sequence where the Page model is still being built up and doesn't match the 'real' state of the model.)
Instead, I'd suggest writing a Django management command to do the tree manipulation - within a management command it is safe to import the Page model from wagtailcore, as well as your specific page models. Page provides a method move(target, pos) which works as per the Treebeard API - the code for moving your child pages might look something like:
from myapp.models import IndexPage
# ...
for index_page in IndexPage.objects.all():
for child_page in index_page.get_children():
child_page.move(index_page, 'right')
index_page.delete()
Theoretically it should be possible to build a move() using the same sort of manipulations that Daniele Miele demonstrates in Django-treebeard and Wagtail page creation. It'd look something like this Python pseudocode:
def move(page, target):
# assuming pos='last_child' but other cases follow similarly,
# just with more bookkeeping
# first, cut it out of its old tree
page.parent.numchild -= 1
for sib in page.right_siblings: # i.e. those with a greater path
old = sib.path
new = sib.path[:-4] + (int(sib.path[-4:])-1):04
sib.path = new
for nib in sib.descendants:
nib.path = nib.path.replace_prefix(old, new)
# now, update itself
old_path = page.path
new_path = target.path + (target.numchild+1):04
page.path = new_path
old_url_path = page.url_path
new_url_path = target.url_path + page.url_path.last
page.url_path = new_url_path
old_depth = page.depth
new_depth = target.depth + 1
page.depth = new_depth
# and its descendants
depth_change = new_depth - old_depth
for descendant in page.descendants:
descendant.path = descendant.path.replace_prefix(old_path, new_path)
descendant.url_path = descendant.url_path.replace_prefix(old_path, new_path)
descendant.depth += depth_change
# finally, update its new parent
target.numchild += 1
The core concept that makes this manipulation simpler than it looks is: when a node gets reordered or moved, all its descendants need to be updated, but the only update they need is the exact same update their ancestor got. It's applied as a prefix replacement (if str) or a difference (if int), neither of which requires knowing anything about the descendant's exact value.
That said, I haven't tested it; it's complex enough to be easy to mess up; and there's no way of knowing if I updated every invariant that Wagtail cares about. So there's something to be said for the management command way as well.

How do I get Swashbuckle to have Swagger UI to group by Version?

I am playing with the new Azure API Apps (template in Visual Studio 2013 w/ the new SDK bits from 3/24/15) and I'd like have my Swagger UI group my calls by Version #. In my case, I'm currently versioning by URI (I realize REST purists will tell me not to do this - please don't try to "correct my error" here). For instance, I may have these calls:
http://example.com/api/Contacts <-- "latest"
http://example.com/api/1/Contacts
http://example.com/api/2/Contacts
http://example.com/api/Contacts{id} <-- "latest"
http://example.com/api/1/Contacts/{id}
http://example.com/api/2/Contacts/{id}
Functionally, this works great! (Yes, I know some of you will cringe. Sorry this hurts your feelings.) However, my problem is w/ Swagger UI organization. By default, Swagger UI groups these by the Controller Name (Contacts in this case). I see in the SwaggerConfig.cs file that I can change this:
// Each operation be assigned one or more tags which are then used by consumers for various reasons.
// For example, the swagger-ui groups operations according to the first tag of each operation.
// By default, this will be controller name but you can use the "GroupActionsBy" option to
// override with any value.
//
//c.GroupActionsBy(apiDesc => apiDesc.HttpMethod.ToString());
What I don't understand is how I can tweak this to group all of the "latest" together and then all of v1 together and then all of v2 together, etc.
How can I do this? If it absolutely must require that I add the word "latest" (or equiv) into the path in place of the version number, then I can do that but I'd prefer not have to do that.
I believe what you're looking to do is to uncomment a line a few lines below that one in SwaggerConfig.cs
c.OrderActionGroupsBy(new DescendingAlphabeticComparer());
except you'd change the name of the class to something like ApiVersionComparer() and then implement it as a new class:
public class ApiVersionComparer : IComparer<string>
{
public int Compare(string x, string y)
{
// Write whatever comparer you'd like to here.
// Yours would likely involve parsing the strings and having
// more complex logic than this....
return -(string.Compare(x, y));
}
}
If you've gotten far enough to ask this question, I'm sure I can leave the sort implementation for you. :-)

CQ5 / AEM5.6 Workflow: Access workflow instance properties from inside OR Split

TL;DR version:
In CQ workflows, is there a difference between what's available to the OR Split compared to the Process Step?
Is it possible to access the /history/ nodes of a workflow instance from within an OR Split?
How?!
The whole story:
I'm working on a workflow in CQ5 / AEM5.6.
In this workflow I have a custom dialog, which stores a couple of properties on the workflow instance.
The path to the property I'm having trouble with is: /workflow/instances/[this instance]/history/[workItem id]/workItem/metaData and I've called the property "reject-or-approve".
The dialog sets the property fine (via a dropdown that lets you set it to "reject" or "approve"), and I can access other properties on this node via a process step (in ecma script) using:
var actionReason;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a Action Reason that is not empty
// store that as 'actionReason' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempActionReason = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('action-message');
if ((tempActionReason != '')&&(tempActionReason != null)) {
actionReason = tempActionReason;
break;
}
}
The process step is not the problem though. Where I'm having trouble is when I try to do the same thing from inside an OR Split.
When I try the same workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow()) in an OR Split, it throws an error saying workItem is not defined.
I've tried storing this property on the payload instead (i.e. storing it under the page's jcr:content), and in that case the property does seem to be available to the OR Split, but my problems with that are:
This reject-or-approve property is only relevant to the current workflow instance, so storing it on the page's jcr:content doesn't really make sense. jcr:content properties will persist after the workflow is closed, and will be accessible to future workflow instances. I could work around this (i.e. don't let workflows do anything based on the property unless I'm sure this instance has written to the property already), but this doesn't feel right and is probably error-prone.
For some reason, when running through the custom dialog in my workflow, only the Admin user group seems to be able to write to the jcr:content property. When I use the dialog as any other user group (which I need to do for this workflow design), the dialog looks as though it's working, but never actually writes to the jcr:content property.
So for a couple of different reasons I'd rather keep this property local to the workflow instance instead of storing it on the page's jcr:content -- however, if anyone can think of a reason why my dialog isn't setting the property on the jcr:content when I use any group other than admin, that would give me a workaround even if it's not exactly the solution I'm looking for.
Thanks in advance if anyone can help! I know this is kind of obscure, but I've been stuck on it for ages.
a couple of days ago i ran into the same issue. The issue here is that you don't have the workItem object, because you don't really have an existing workItem. Imagine the following: you are going through the workflow, you got a couple of workItems, with means, either process step, either inbox item. When you are in an or split, you don't have existing workItems, you can ensure by visiting the /workItems node of the workflow instance. Your workaround seems to be the only way to go through this "issue".
I've solved it. It's not all that elegant looking, but it seems to be a pretty solid solution.
Here's some background:
Dialogs seem to reliably let you store properties either on:
the payload's jcr:content node (which wasn't practical for me, because the payload is locked during the workflow, and doesn't let non-admins write to its jcr:content)
the workItem/metaData for the current workflow step
However, Split steps don't have access to workItem. I found a fairly un-helpful confirmation of that here: http://blogs.adobe.com/dmcmahon/2013/03/26/cq5-failure-running-script-etcworkflowscriptscaworkitem-ecma-referenceerror-workitem-is-not-defined/
So basically the issue was, the Dialog step could store the property, but the OR Split couldn't access it.
My workaround was to add a Process step straight after the Dialog in my workflow. Process steps do have access to workItem, so they can read the property set by the Dialog. I never particularly wanted to store this data on the payload's jcr:content, so I looked for another location. It turns out the workflow metaData (at the top level of the workflow instance node, rather than workItem/metaData, which is inside the /history sub-node) is accessible to both the Process step and the OR Split. So, my Process step now reads the workItem's approveReject property (set by the Dialog), and then writes it to the workflow's metaData node. Then, the OR Split reads the property from its new location, and does its magic.
The way you access the workflow metaData from the Process step and the OR Split is not consistent, but you can get there from both.
Here's some code: (complete with comments. You're welcome)
In the dialog where you choose to approve or reject, the name of the field is set to rejectApprove. There's no ./ or anything before it. This tells it to store the property on the workItem/metaData node for the current workflow step under /history/.
Straight after the dialog, a Process step runs this:
var rejectApprove;
var history = workflowSession.getHistory(workItem.getWorkflow());
// loop backwards through workItems
// and as soon as we find a rejectApprove that is not empty
// store that as 'rejectApprove' and break.
for (var index = history.size() - 1; index >= 0; index--) {
var previous = history.get(index);
var tempRejectApprove = previous.getWorkItem().getMetaDataMap().get('rejectApprove');
if ((tempRejectApprove != '')&&(tempRejectApprove != null)) {
rejectApprove = tempRejectApprove;
break;
}
}
// steps up from the workflow step into the workflow metaData,
// and stores the rejectApprove property there
// (where it can be accessed by an OR Split)
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
Then after the Process step, the OR Split has the following in its tabs:
function check() {
var match = 'approve';
if (workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') == match) {
return true;
} else {
return false;
}
}
Note: use this for the tab for the "approve" path, then copy it and replace var match = 'approve' with var match = 'reject'
So the key here is that from a Process step:
workItem.getWorkflowData().getMetaData().put('rejectApprove', rejectApprove);
writes to the same property that:
workflowData.getMetaData().get('rejectApprove') reads from when you execute it in an OR Split.
To suit our business requirements, there's more to the workflow I've implemented than just this, but the method above seems to be a pretty reliable way to get values that are entered in a dialog, and access them from within an OR Split.
It seems pretty silly that the OR Split can't access the workItem directly, and I'd be interested to know if there's a less roundabout way of doing this, but for now this has solved my problem.
I really hope someone else has this same problem, and finds this useful, because it took me waaay to long to figure out, to only apply it once!

Plone 4 - History for second workflow won't show in ##historyview

I have a dexterity content type in Plone 4.2.4. The versioning works fine with the default workflow for this content type, although it is not a workflow shipped with plone, but a custom made.
However, when I enable a second workflow for the same type, everything but the versioning works fine.
additional permissions managed by the second workflow are working
The state changes are working
The difference:
I used different state_variable names for the workflows, which seems to make sense, to have a catalogable field for the state of the second workflow.
I've tried to use the same state variable name, but that didn't help. I have the workflow variable review_history also set in the 2nd workflow and sufficient permissions in the context.
I am (mostly) shure, that I got the permission concept, but I have no clou, how permissions get calculated, when multiple workflows are involved.
Any idea, why the second workflow does not leave a trace in my content types history?
Thanks very much in advance.
Udate
I've reordered the workflows as Ida Ebkes suggested and did see, that all transitions from the 2nd workflow get stored properly. So it seems to be an issue with the historyview.
Since these workflows indeed describe concurrent behaviors of a content type, I really would like to stick with separate workflows and ideally different workflow state variables and catalog indexes.
What I now think needs to be done, is to tweak the historyview.
Here is how I did it. It works for plone 4.2.4 at least.
Since the problem was a display problem, I just had to tweak my historyviewlet. Therefore, I created a folder named viewlets in my product root and created a __init__.py and a configure.zcml file. Then i copied content_history.pt, history_view.pt, review_history.pt and content.py from plone/app/layout/viewlets/ (omelette) to the newly created folder.
The configure.zcml contains two view registrations:
<browser:view
for="*"
name="my-contenthistory"
class=".content.ContentHistoryView"
permission="zope2.View"
/>
<browser:page
for="*"
name="my-historyview"
template="history_view.pt"
permission="zope2.View"
/>
Furthermore, I copied the whole WorkflowHistoryViewlet class from content.py to a different class name. TransferHistory in this case. Then I changed mostly the part that corresponds to the workflow state variable, which was not review_state, but transfer_state. I further found that the initial usage of the 2nd workflow creates also a created entry in the history of the 2nd workflow, that I just filtered .
transfer_history = [x for x in transfer_history if x['action'] != None]
The I corrected the view name in history_view.pt to my new view name.
<div tal:replace="structure here/##my-contenthistory">Content History</div>
Finally, I added my class as parent to the ContentHistoryViewlet class in content.py
class ContentHistoryViewlet(WorkflowHistoryViewlet, TransferHistoryViewlet):
index = ViewPageTemplateFile("content_history.pt")
#memoize
def getUserInfo(self, userid):
[...]
def fullHistory(self):
history = self.workflowHistory() + self.revisionHistory() + self.transferHistory()
if len(history) == 0:
return None
history.sort(key=lambda x: x["time"], reverse=True)
return history
and registered the .zcml in the products configure.zcml
<include package=".viewlets" />
Then I modified content_history.pt and also changed the definition of action_id in the upper part of the file.
[...]
action_id python:item['action'] or item.get('review_state', False) or item.get('transfer_state', False);
[...]
After rebooting the monster and a product reinstall, all state changes from both workflows are shown in the my-historyview.

How two people, concurrently editing the same file is handled?

I believe the title says it. I'm new to source control thingy.
So, let's say I have two developers working on the same project and they started editing the same file(s) at the same time then everyone of them send the new version at a slightly different time. From what I understand the one who sends the changes last will have his changes kept, the other one's code will be in the archive only!!!
Is that correct?
Please clarify. Thanks.
No, that's not quite correct. It depends somewhat on which version control software you're using, but I like Git so I'll talk about that.
Suppose we have a file Foo.java:
class Foo {
public void printAWittyMessage() {
// TODO: Be witty
}
}
Alice and Bob both modify the file. Alice does this:
class Foo {
public void printAWittyMessage() {
System.out.println("Alice is the coolest");
}
}
and Bob does this:
class Foo {
public void printAWittyMessage() {
System.out.println("Alice is teh suk");
}
}
Alice checks her version in first. When Bob attempts to check his in, Git will warn him that there is a conflict and won't allow the commit to be pushed into the main repository. Bob has to update his local repository and fix the conflict. He'll get something like this:
class Foo {
public void printAWittyMessage() {
<<<<< HEAD:<some git nonsense>
System.out.println("Alice is the coolest");
=====
System.out.println("Alice is teh suk");
>>>>> blahdeblahdeblah:<some more git nonsense>
}
}
The <<<<<, ===== and >>>>> markers show which lines were changed simultaneously. Bob must resolve the conflict in some sensible way, remove the markers, and commit the result.
So what eventually lives in the repository is:
Original version -> Alice's version -> Bob's conflict-fixed version.
To summarise: the first to commit gets in without any problems, the second to commit must resolve the conflict before getting into the repository. You should never end up with someone's changes being clobbered automatically. Obviously Bob can resolve the conflict incorrectly but the beauty of version control is that you can roll back the incorrect fix and repair it.
Much depends on the system you're using.
However in the common case is: who commits his changes second would have to perform a "merge" operation. Meaning s/he would need to compare the two files and come up with a merged version. However (!) many popular system (including IDE) comes with smart tools to assist you doing that.
Here are some tools like that compared:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_file_comparison_tools