From the software development trenches - All Comments

Code Review Sidekick in action

Team Foundation Sidekicks — Fri, 03 Oct 2008 07:12:12 GMT

Right after writing post about using Code Review Sidekick I came across a post by Carel Lotz , that describes

Websites tagged "ankhsvn" on Postsaver

Websites tagged "ankhsvn" on Postsaver — Sun, 14 Sep 2008 15:02:20 GMT

Pingback from Websites tagged "ankhsvn" on Postsaver

re: SDLC Progress

ahmeds — Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:20:54 GMT

Why not use Team Build? Ok just saw your other post. Maybe check out www.codeplex.com/nunit4teambuild

SDLC Progress

From the software development trenches — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:07:30 GMT

I've been spending the last month or two getting the SDLC procedures and infrastructure in place

SDLC Progress

From the software development trenches — Mon, 01 Sep 2008 19:07:26 GMT

I've been spending the last month or two getting the SDLC procedures and infrastructure in place

Code Reviews using TFS Tools

From the software development trenches — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 18:47:31 GMT

I've previously blogged about using code reviews as an effective way to minimize defects, improve

re: Conventions for Generated and Shared Code

cjlotz — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 06:44:43 GMT

Also see the following post for how to make your generated code play along nicely with FxCop

blogs.msdn.com/.../correct-usage-of-the-compilergeneratedattribute-and-the-generatedcodeattribute.aspx

CruiseControl Setup

AlSki.net — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 22:36:20 GMT

CruiseControl Setup

re: Conventions for Generated and Shared Code

Ran Davidovitz — Tue, 05 Aug 2008 08:53:22 GMT

Regarding Shared Code, the best practice should be to NOT link project to the same Shared Code (E.g. Classes) but to create a new project (E.g. Common) and consume it in each dependent project.

Regarding Generated Code - if the process of generating the code is deterministic and is not influence by developement environment version than i would agree that it should not be maintained in source control

re: .NET Continuous Integration Servers

cjlotz — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:54:55 GMT

Keith

I had a look at the Cruise web-site the other day and was disappointed in the lack of information on what features it supported etc. As with JetBrains, I generally find the software delivered by ThoughtWorks to be great, so I assume it will be a powerful solution that takes into account the years of CI learning Thoughworks have. Unfortunately it has a price tag. Our setup is small enough to use the free professional version of TeamCity so we'll stick with using it. It really is a great product.

re: .NET Continuous Integration Servers

Keith Bloom — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 10:13:14 GMT

Hi Carel,

An interesting post and a conclusion I have started to reach having dumped the MSTest framework and gone with NUnit. TFS Build just isn't up to the task yet and the reporting is poor. Have you had a look at the new version of CC.Net yet studios.thoughtworks.com/.../cruise-pricing-and-license

.NET Continuous Integration Servers

From the software development trenches — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:19:09 GMT

It seems like I spend a lot of time on this blog talking about Continuous Integration   Well, in

.NET Continuous Integration Servers

From the software development trenches — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 06:19:07 GMT

It seems like I spend a lot of time on this blog talking about Continuous Integration   Well, in

re: Continuous Integration: From Theory to Practice 2nd Edition

si — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:47:03 GMT

Hi again, one thing I just implemented which you may be interested in is merging our NUnit and NCover targets so unit tests are only executed once instead of twice.

Since NCover invokes NUnit (or whatever), I just added the option to output xml results for each test assembly, and then CruiseControl.NET picks up both NCover and NUnit results for merging.

So our MSBuild NCover task CommandLineArgs attribute is now:

CommandLineArgs="$(DOUBLE_QUOTES)%(TestAssemblies.FullPath)$(DOUBLE_QUOTES) /nologo /xml=$(DOUBLE_QUOTES)$(CIArtifactDirectory)\nunit-result-%(TestAssemblies.Filename).xml$(DOUBLE_QUOTES)"

The only caveat to this may be if you record test times, as I'm guessing NCover may slightly influence the execution time. However, that shouldn't be a problem if you always do this, only in moving from one approach to the other.

What do think?

re: Conventions for Generated and Shared Code

Alistair — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 10:48:47 GMT

Thx. Another useful standard in terms of generated code is to actually not keep the generated output under source control. We use a large amount of generated code and only keep the inputs for the generators under source control and not the outputs.

We then have the generators run as part of the build process.