Comments on: Simple continous integration If you're using Visual Studio, you may as well shell out the extra $$ and get Team Foundation Server as well, it is really good. For a start, it has a concept of shelvesets (which allow you to store your changeset on the server without committing it). Secondly it has a very flexible automated build system which lets you do CI builds, regular builds (ie hourly, daily, weekly, whatever), gated check-ins (I prefer these to CI, because only code that compiles, passes unit tests and meets code-analysis constraints ever gets checked in, which means your head revision is always clean and sparkly). Also, in TFS 2010, the build scripts are all workflows which can be edited in a visual editor. Not to mention the fact that it also comes with a sophisticated work-item management system. I'm lucky enough to work for a company that pays for an MSDN ultimate subscription for me and each of my colleagues, so we get the full testing and design tooling as well. If you’re using Visual Studio, you may as well shell out the extra $$ and get Team Foundation Server as well, it is really good. For a start, it has a concept of shelvesets (which allow you to store your changeset on the server without committing it). Secondly it has a very flexible automated build system which lets you do CI builds, regular builds (ie hourly, daily, weekly, whatever), gated check-ins (I prefer these to CI, because only code that compiles, passes unit tests and meets code-analysis constraints ever gets checked in, which means your head revision is always clean and sparkly). Also, in TFS 2010, the build scripts are all workflows which can be edited in a visual editor.

Not to mention the fact that it also comes with a sophisticated work-item management system. I’m lucky enough to work for a company that pays for an MSDN ultimate subscription for me and each of my colleagues, so we get the full testing and design tooling as well.

]]>
By: Tomasz DÄ…browski/2011/03/17/simple-continous-integration/#comment-1807 Tomasz DÄ…browski Sun, 20 Mar 2011 15:10:18 +0000 I'm interning at a big software company at the moment, and one of my first assignments has been to help set up CI on a particular project. We're using Hudson (now known as Jenkins but of course corporate hasn't endorsed an update since early last year). It's open source (and hence free), plug-in-based (and hence as lightweight or bloated as you want it to be), and has a strong community around it for support etc. So really, NIH is the only reason to build your own CI. That said, I've only been involved in configuring Hudson to work with this one project. I don't know how much of a pain it was to install and set it up initially. And it may not be suited for some particular projects, I don't really know. I’m interning at a big software company at the moment, and one of my first assignments has been to help set up CI on a particular project. We’re using Hudson (now known as Jenkins but of course corporate hasn’t endorsed an update since early last year). It’s open source (and hence free), plug-in-based (and hence as lightweight or bloated as you want it to be), and has a strong community around it for support etc.
So really, NIH is the only reason to build your own CI. That said, I’ve only been involved in configuring Hudson to work with this one project. I don’t know how much of a pain it was to install and set it up initially. And it may not be suited for some particular projects, I don’t really know.

]]>