We're trying to set up Jenkins with the latest version of StyleCop.
Our existing Jenkins setup invokes StyleCop via StyleCopCmd via nant, but StyleCopCmd seems to be increasingly out-of-date, and unmaintained; and I’d rather cut it out. So best supported solution seems to be to invoke StyleCop from msbuild.
Our solution consists of multiple projects, but the Jenkins Violations plugin expects a single stylecop.violations.xml file, so the widely documented solution of importing StyleCop.targets and invoking it from each 'csproj' file seems like it won’t work (because this would produce multiple violations files, which the Jenkins plugin can't cope with).
SO:
Is there some way of merging multiple StyleCop violations files so that they are treated as one by the Jenkins Violations plugin, OR
Is there some way, in Msbuild, of peeking into multiple '.csproj' files, extracting the '.cs' files and running them all through StyleCop in a one-er. Alternatively:
Given we're using Jenkins and multiple project files, is there another way of reporting violations for all of the projects in the solution?
Any help gratefully received.
See this: http://ferritedog.wordpress.com/2011/05/27/1-hour-guide-to-continuous-integration-setup-jenkins-meets-net/
Basically, use the XML FileName Pattern **/*/StyleCopViolations.xml.
Related
Similar to this question, I want to run multiple Run Configurations as one. However, instead of running them simultaneously (parallel), I want to run them after one another in a specific order.
I know I can select another Run Configuration to run before another, like answered here, but approach has one issue: it's not possible to have one generic/main/super Run Configuration that runs nothing else than the specified run configurations. I must to pick one project-specific configuration (e.g. a Python configuration in PyCharm, the JetBrains Python IDE similar to IntelliJ IDEA) to be able to choose Run Configurations to run serially before the main one. This is an issue, because if I ever want to change to or insert a different configuration where the main Python Run Configuration is, I need to remake the Run Configuration Order besides a new one. With a predefined serial list of Run Configurations to execute, this would be as simple as inserting another configuration in the list.
Is this possible and how do I achieve this?
Besides the Before launch functionality mentioned in the question, there is no such possibility in IntelliJ IDEA and other JetBrains IDEs to my knowledge. However, there exists plugins that add Run Configurations that initially do nothing (empty), which can be considered as a generic/main/super Run Configuration. In such a configuration the regular way of specifying other configurations to run sequentially before launch can be used to achieve the question's goal.
An example of a plugin that adds an initially empty Run Configuration is the Multirun plugin. Don't be confused by its name: it's meant to run multiple Run Configurations simultaneously with the option to start them sequentially, but it does not wait for earlier ones to finish before starting the later ones. Just add the default (empty) Multirun configuration and queue up other tasks to run sequentially through the Before launch section.
It's a pity JetBrains haven't added a serial/sequential execution configuration in their Compound Run Configuration, which basically achieves what the Multirun plugin achieves: simultaneous / parallel execution. With compound run configurations, the Run Configuration editor would become a really powerful but simple to program configurations for various wishes like Gradle achieves for more complex build configurations.
I have a solution that is using an hybrid .csproj and project.json combination (for nuget management purposes). So basically the "project.json" file is working as a "packages.config" file with a floating version capability.
This solution is using a custom RuleSet that is being distributed via Package, and is imported automatically. On the dev machine, works without a problem.
At the build machine (that is, inside the machine itself, working as an user) the solution also compiles without a problem.
However, when a vNext build (is this the name for the new build system?) is queued, it ignores completely the custom ruleset and just uses the StyleCop one (that is also included), which gives a bunch of warnings. Said warnings should not appear as the Custom RuleSet basically suppresses those warnings (ie: Warning SA1404: Code analysis suppression must have justification,
Warning SA1124: Do not use regions, etc)
As far as I have checked, there is no setting to specify the ruleset, and this works with XAML Builds. What is different in this new build system that is causing this? Is there a way to force/specify the Code Analysis Rule Set from the definition?
Thanks in advance for any help or advice on the matter.
Update/Edit
After debugging back and forth with the wonderful help of jessehouwing I must include the following detail on my initial report (that I ignored as I did not know that it was influential):
I am using SonarQube Analysis on my build definition.
I initially did not mention it as I did not know that it replaces the Code Analysis at Build Time (and not only when it "analyzes", as I thought).
If you are using the SonarQube tasks
The SonarQube tasks generate a new Code Analysis Ruleset file on the fly and will overwrite the one configured for the projects. These rulesets will be used regardless of what you've previously specified.
There is a trick to the naming of the rulesets through which you can include your own overrides.
More information on the structure can be found in the blog post from the SonarQube/Visual Studio team. Basically when you Bind your solution to SonarQube it will generate 2 ruleset files. One which will be overwritten during build, the other containing your customizations.
There is a toolkit/SDK to generate a SonarQube plugin for custom analyzers which allow you to import your rules into SonarQube, so it will know what rules to activate for your project(s).
If you're not using SonarQube
Yes you can specify the ruleset you want to use and force Code Analysis to run. It requires a couple of MsBuild arguments:
/p:RunCodeAnalysis=true /p:CodeAnalysisRuleset="PathToRuleset"
Or you can use my MsBuild helper extension to configure these settings with the help of a UI template:
Please don't be too harsh, because I do not grasp this entirely correctly still, but msbuild/msdeploy is giving me some headaches lately.
Hopefully someone can provide a textual aspirin of some kind? So here is what I want to do:
I have a web application project, that has multiple configurations, thus multiple web.config-transforms.
I would like to deploy this project from command line.
I would rather not want to modify its project file. (I want to be able to do this for several web applications so as least as editing as possible is much appreciated)
I would like to be able to build it only once and then deploy the different configurations from it.
So far I deployed from command line using something like this:
msbuild D:\pathToFile\DeployVariation01.csproj
/p:Configuration=Debug;
Platform=AnyCpu;
DeployOnBuild=true;
DeployTarget=MSDeployPublish;
MSDeployServiceURL="localhost";
DeployIisAppPath="DeployApp/DeployThis01";
MSDeployPublishMethod=InProc
And this performs just what I want, except it only deploys the "Debug"-Configuration.
How can I, with minimal adjustments, make it deploy my other configurations as well?
I was thinking maybe I could build a package that includes all my configurations and then deploy from that and decide "while deploying" which configuration to deploy?
Unfortuanetly I am pretty much stuck here, the approaches I have read about all seem to require some modifications to project files, is there a way around that?
UPDATE:
I am still not really where I want to be here :).
But I looked into this PackageWeb-approach (also interesting video about that here) and it seems pretty nice; I can now build a package that includes all my transforms and then deploy from that as often as I want into multiple configurations.
One thing that I dislike about this is that I have to store my password in plain text into the generated parameters file for the powershell script, does someone know a way around this, I really would rather have that being an encrypted password.
Also other approaches to solve my original problem are still appreciated.
I am working on the same problem and am taking two paths using Microsoft Web Deploy or MSDeploy which is now in version 3.0.
I first compile the project using MSBUILD using the Package target passing in system.configuration, system.packagelocation. The Package Target generates a set of package files including a {PackageName}.SetParameters.xml file. The SetParameters.xml file by default allows on-publish changes to ConnectionStrings without recompiling when using msdeploy.exe to publish the file. The publish transformation process can also be customized by adding a parameters.xml file to the process defining additional parameterized web.config settings which can be changed at deploy time.
After the initial build I use the {PackageName}.deploy.cmd file generated by MSBUILD during the Package process to deploy the package to the target website. The Package process essentially duplicates the process you are currently doing from MSBUILD in that I can publish one Build-Configuration web.config transform from one compile. The process provides a consistent deployment process that can target remote servers from a central CI environment, which is great from a purely deployment process. The PackageBuild/Deploy process is parameterized within TeamCity, requiring changes to only a few parameters to setup a new deployment.
Like you, I cannot, however, compile a single version of code and deploy to multiple servers using the process as it exists today - which is my current focus. I want to parameterize the transform in a Continuous Deployment, build-once-deploy-many pattern to Dev, QA, User Testing, Staging, and Production.
I anticipate using one of two methods:
Create a Parameters.xml file for each project defining the variable deployment parameters along with a custom {ServerName}.SetParameters.xml for each target deployment, both to be used in conjunction with msdeploy.exe.
a. I am not sure defining a parameters.xml is a flexible enough process for my needs as the current project inserts and removes a variable number of web.config settings. Implementing a parameters file incorporating all of the variables could be too complex for my taste. I would also end up creating all of the target transformations, instead of the current developers initiated process. Not ideal.
I am following up on very recent updates to VS2012 Web Tools 2012.2 which allow tying a web.config transform to the publish profiles (profile.pubxml) now stored under SolutionName/Properties/PublishProfiles in VS2012.
VS2012 release 2012.2 adds the capability to create a second transform tied to the publish profile. The resulting transform process first runs the build configuration transformation, followed by the publish transformation, i.e. Release Transform followed by TargetServer Transform. Sayed Hashimi has a great YouTube video demonstrating the entire process using MSBUILD.
What is not entirely clear is whether the second transform is supported separately from the build using MSDeploy in a Continuous Deployment, build-once-deploy-many Pattern, or if the publish transformation is only supported during a separate Package/Build for each target transformation.
Option 1 will definitely work for some environments and was my first plan for tackling a Continuous Deployment process. I would much rather use Web Transforms to accomplish the process if possible.
An outside third possibility is using one of several CodePlex commandline projects that are capable of transforming web.config using the XDT transform engine. Unfortunately, using these tools would mean splicing the results into the Build/Package MSBUILD process in order to get the resulting web.config transformation into the deployment package - something I've not yet been successful in accomplishing. Sayed Hashimi also has a PackageWeb project from 2012 that might work as well. I am hoping his more recent work replaces the need for the extra steps involved in the packageweb solution.
Let me know if you decide on a solution - as I am definitely interested.
I have a project that need to be deployed into multiple environments (prod, test, dev). The main differences mainly consist in configuration properties/files.
My idea was to use profiles and overlays to copy/configure the specialized output. But I'm stuck into if I have to generate multiple artifacts with specialized classifiers (ex: "my-app-1.0-prod.zip/jar", "my-app-1.0-dev.zip/jar") or should I create multiple projects, one project for every environment ?!
Should I use maven-assembly-plugin to generate multiple artifacts for every environment ?
Anyway, I'll need to generate all them at once so it seams that the profiles does not fit ... still puzzled :(
Any hints/examples/links will be more than welcomed.
As a side issue, I'm also wondering how to achieve this in a CI Hudson/Bamboo to generate and deploy these generated artifacts for all the environments, to their proper servers (ex: using SCP Hudson plugin) ?
I prefer to package configuration files separately from the application. This allows you to run the EXACT same application and supply the configuration at run time. It also allows you to generate configuration files after the fact for an environment you didn't know you would need at build time. e.g. CERT
I use the "assembly" tool to zip up each domain's config files into named files.
I would use the version element (like 1.0-SNAPSHOT, 1.0-UAT, 1.0-PROD) and thus tags/branches at the VCS level in combination with profiles (for environments specific things like machines names, user name passwords, etc), to build the various artifacts.
We implemented a m2 plugin to build the final .properties using the following approach:
The common, environment-unaware settings are read from common.properties.
The specific, environment-aware settings are read from dev.properties, test.properties or production.properties, thus overriding default values if necessary.
The final .properties files is written to disk with the Properties instance after reading the files in given order.
Such .properties file is what gets bundled depending on the target environment.
We use profiles to achieve that, but we only have the default profile - which we call "development" profile, and has configuration files on it, and we have a "release" profile, where we don't include the configuration files (so they can be properly configured when the application is installed).
I would use profiles to do it, and I would append the profile in the artifact name if you need to deploy it. I think it is somewhat similar to what Pascal had suggested, only that you will be using profiles and not versions.
PS: Another reason why we have dev/ release profiles only, is that whenever we send something for UAT or PROD, it has been released, so if there is a bug we can track down what the state of the code was when the application was released - it is easier to tag it in SVN than trying to find its state from the commit history.
I had this exact scenario last summer.
I ended up using profiles for each higher environment with classifiers. Default profile was "do no harm" development build. I had a DEV, INT, UAT, QA, and PROD profile.
I ended up defining multiple jobs within Hudson to generate the region specific artifacts.
The one thing I would have done differently was to architect the projects a bit differently so that the region specific build was outside of the modularized main project. That was it would simply pull in the lastest artifacts for each specific build rather than rebuild the entire project for each region.
In fact, when I setup the jobs, the QA and PROD jobs were always setup to build off of a tag. Clearly this is something that you would tailor to your specific workplace rules on deployment.
Try using https://github.com/khmarbaise/multienv-maven-plugin to create one main WAR and one configuration JAR for each environment.
Ok, so I've got a somewhat complicated problem with my build environment that I'm trying to deal with.
I have a solution file that contains multiple C# projects which is built by a NAnt script calling MSBuild - passing MSBuild the name of the solution file and a path to copy the binaries to. This is because I want my automated build environment (CruiseControl.Net) to create a folder named after the revision of each build - this way I can easily go back to previous binaries for any reason.
So idealy I have a folder layout like this
c:\build\nightly\rev1
c:\build\nightly\rev2
c:\build\nightly\rev3
...
c:\build\nightly\rev10
etc.
The problem that's arisen is I recently added the latest version of the Unity IoC container to my project, checking it directly out of MS's online SVN repository. What's happening is I have a Silverlight 3 project that references the Silverlight version of Unity but I also have other projects (namely my Unit testing project) that reference the standard (non-Silverlight) version of Unity.
So what happens is since MSBuild is dumping everything into one single folder the Silverlight version of the Unity assembly is overwriting the non-Silverlight version because they have the exact same assembly file name.
Then when CruistControl runs my unit tests they fail because they don't have the proper dependencies available anymore (they try to load the Silverlight specific Unity assembly which obviously doesn't work).
So what I want to do is:
keep my desired output directory
structure (folder\revision)
I don't want to have to manually edit
every single proj file I have as this
is error prone when adding new
projects to the solution
Idealy I would like MSBuild to put everything into a folder structure similar to this:
nightly\revision1\project1
nightly\revision1\project2
nightly\revision1\project3
...
nightly\revision2\project1
nightly\revision2\project2
nightly\revision2\project3
etc
I can't modify the Unity project to give it a different file name because it comes from another SVN repository I cannot commit changes to. I found a similar question posted here and the suggested solution was to use a "master" MSBuild file that used a custom task to extract all the project file names out of the solution then loop over each one building them. I tried that but it doesn't build them in the order of their dependencies, so it fails for my project.
Help?
Firstly I would always have the build server delete the old working copy and check out a fresh copy to avoid any problems with stale artifacts from the previous build.
Next I would have nant or msbuild build the solutions as before with the artifacts from each build going to their local working output folders.
After that I'd move the artifacts from their working paths to their output paths, this shouldn't require digging through the project files since you can just tell msbuild/nant to copy working\project1\bin\release\**\*.* to artifacts\project1\.
The script that does this should ideally be stored along with the source with the main file, e.g. build.nant or build.proj in top level of the trunk.
For third party libraries I would simple include the DLLs directory in your repository. Nothing worse than writing some code and having a third party dependency break your build because of changes on their end.
Simply document the versions of the libraries you are using, and if you must update them, you'll have a better sense of what breaks the build before you even check it in.
Also, doesn't CC.Net automatically handle the providing of releases based on revision? I'm using TeamCity and it keeps a copy of the artifacts of every build.
I highly recommend reading JP Boodhoo's Automating Builds with NAnt blog series. That's been my starting point and have made lots of changes for my own taste. I also highly recommend checking out the builds of many open sources projects for examples. I've learned a lot from the builds of the Castle/Nhibernate/Rhino-Tools stack.