I see this time and time again. The UAT test manager wants the new build to be ready to test by Friday. The one of the first questions asked, in the pre-testing meeting is, "what version will I be testing, against?" (which is a fair question to ask). The room goes silent, then someone will come back with, "All the assemblies have their own version, just right-click and look at the properties...".
From the testing managers point-of-view, this is no use. They want a version/label/tag across everything that tells them what they are working on. They want this information easily avaialble.
I have seen solutions where the version of diffierent areas of a system being stored in a datastore, then shown on the main application's about box. Problem is, this needs to be maintained.
What solutions have you seen that gets around this on going problem?
EDIT. The distributed system covers VB6, Classic ASP, VB.Net, C#, Web Services (accross departments, so which version are we using ?), SQL Server 2005.
I think the problem is that you and your testing manager are speaking of two different things. Assembly versions are great for assemblies, but your test manager is speaking of a higher-level version, a "system version", if you will. At least that's my read of your post.
What you have to do in such situations is map all of your different component assemblies into a system version. You say something along the lines of "Version 1.5 of the system is composed of Foo.Bar.dll v1.4.6 and Baz.Qux.dll v2.6.7 and (etc.)". Hell, in a distributed system, you may want different versions for each of your services, which may in and of themselves, be composed of different versions of .dlls. You might say, for example: "Version 1.5 of the system is composed of the Foo service v1.3, which is composed of Foo.dll v1.9.3 and Bar.dll v1.6.9, and the Bar service v1.9, which is composed of Baz.dll v1.8.2 and Qux.dll v1.5.2 and (etc.)".
Doing stuff like this is typically the job of the software architect and/or build manager in your organization.
There are a number of tools that you can use to handle this issue that have nothing to do with your language of choice. My personal favorite is currently Jira, which, in addition to bug tracking, has great product versioning and roadmapping support.
Might want to have a look at this page that explains some ways to integrate consistent versioning into your build process.
There are a number of different things that contribute to the problem. Off of the top of my head, here's one:
One of the benefits of a distributed architecture is that we gain huge potential for re-use by creating services and publishing their interfaces in some form or another. What that then means is that releases of a client application are not necessarily closely synchronized with releases of the underlying services. So, a new version of a business application may be released that uses the same old reliable service it's been using for a year. How shall we then apply a single release tag in this case?
Nevertheless, it's a fair question, but one that requires a non-trivial answer to be meaningful.
Not using build based version numbering for anything but internal references. When the UAT manager asks the question you say "Friday's*".
The only trick then is to make sure labelling happens reliably in your source control.
* insert appropriate datestamp/label here
We use .NET and Subversion. All of our application assemblies share a version number, which is derived from a manually updated major and minor revision numbers and the Subversion revision number (<major>.<minor>.<revision>). We have a prebuild task that updates this version number in a shared AssemblyVersionInfo.vb file. Then when testers ask for the version number, we can either give them the full 3-part number or just the subversion revision. The libraries we consume aren't changing or the change is not relevant to the tester.
Related
Since we can point and click in SSMS to obtain DDL, there must be an assembly or DLL of some sort called by the GUI. Does anyone have any familiarity with how to tap into that?
The drive for this comes from our need to capture DDL as part of jobs. Some of our batches only need the data for one table or even one index, others could use the entire database. Getting the detail as needed is critical. That detail might be used as part of a procedure or placed into a file.
I know there are various solutions to the problem of batch/automated retrieval of SQL Server DDL (versions 2000-2014) on the web. None are directly supported by Microsoft, and for what I need, that is a considerable weakness.
Of the items on the web, some use scripts and the system views/tables to build DDL. I admire the work that went into these, but such things may have problematic support and can break from SQL Server version to SQL Server version. Also, a number of vendors have tools, and there is at least one open source project (OpenDiff) that ventures into this area. But vendor tools won't easily fit into my batch streams. And third party tools also require installation on client systems, which is always a sensitive area, and usually have licensing requirements. Any third party tool, of course, introduces the various types of vendor dependencies.
There is one item I have found, SMOScript, that uses SMOs (with which I am only slightly familiar). Perhaps that is doing something similar to what I want, though the limited notes on the project imply that it does not allow the detail needed such as for a single index. From a management viewpoint, it also introduces a dependency on that project and its single author.
That assembly used by SSMS, whatever it is, must be kept up to date by MS. If calling that is possible (though I am sure it is foolish to hope it is also simple), the weakness of a third party dependency is eliminated. So I don't need web links to scripts and third party tools for those I have (yet thanks for the thought), but if someone can point me toward what SSMS is using, that might be a great help. In the meantime, for what its worth, I'll be researching SMOs.
I was reading many articles about version control systems like SVN, Git and various branching models (feature based, release based and others) but none of them did not seem to fit our project requirements.
We (team) are going to develop a framework, which will be used as core for different applications. So, there will be one framework and more than one different applications built on that framework. Each application will have usual project cycle: builds, releases... Framework itself won't be released but may have tagged different versions. During the development of application, we want to commit some common features to the framework (if we see that feature is great and future applications should have it).
So each application is like a separate branch of framework, but it will never be fully merged back (because it's a separate application) and there is need do some commits to framework (trunk). Some online articles such commits (without merging whole branch to trunk) gives as negative examples, so we are confused.
What version control system and branching model do you recommend for such development cycle?
So each application is like a separate branch of framework, but it
will never be fully merged back (because it's a separate application)
and there is need do some commits to framework (trunk). Some online
articles such commits (without merging whole branch to trunk) gives as
negative examples, so we are confused.
This part scares me a bit. If you are going to have a framework, then you need to take care of it like any other lump of code, and you don't want multiple versions running around for any reason except maintenance of existing releases or work on future releases. So each of your "application" projects can have a branch where they modify the framework as required for the application, but I recommend the framework trunk be updated often so that it evolves in a way that best serves the needs of all of your applications. In general, when branching for code going forward, you want to sync up with the master and put code back into the master as quickly as possible to avoid lots of work handling merges and also give others the benefit of the work.
You should put your framework in a separate area (or repository if you are using a DVCS like git or hg) so that it's distinct and may have its own release cycle if necessary.
The DVCSs are all the rage these days, git and hg being the most popular, so you should look into them. They have different ways of handling branching. Their power lies in the fact that there is no centralized repository so it's more flexible and reliable for larger teams.
We have an application developed over Oracle 10 G (DS) forms connected with the Oracle Database in which time by time there are changes we need to make in scripts and procedures defined.
Task assigned to our group is to find out possible Version Controlling and Release Logs Maintaining Mechanism that could record every change made and release finalized in database.
I want a word of suggestion from all the experienced people out here, what could be the best possible solution of our problem, ideally a single solution or multiple ones.
(I am not very Oracle Form-Literate, so apologizes if I sounded confusing)
Have a look at this and this.
The first link is about .Net projects, but gives you concrete examples for how to set up your development processes; the second link is a general approach from Martin Fowler, who is a bit of an authority on software development.
The basics are that you have to script/automate as much of the deployment lifecycle as possible, and version everything.
I don't know much about Oracle Forms, but as far as I know, this approach should work.
There are many different version schemes, and it seems like every major software company uses a different scheme, but I would like to know which scheme is best for mISV.
Also, if you can, I would like you to write which scheme do you use in your company, pros and cons of such scheme, and why you have chosen that scheme.
Related Questions
Deciding on version numbers
How to do version numbers?
How do you know what version number to use?
What is your preferred style of product version number and why? (this answers my second question)
Versioning Style Guide
Semantic Versioning (this is probably the best versioning scheme for components, not sure about applications for end-users)
Hints
This is a list of hints I've found on the internet:
Use at least three-part version numbers (2.9.0, 2.10.0) so it is obvious they are not decimals.
Use date/time based versiong (source)
Method to extract compile time from .NET automatic version scheme
Automatic versioning using MSBuild.Community.Tasks
mISV programs can be characterize by a high release rate, and at least by a high build rate (up to several builds a day).
In that context, it can be interesting to monitor:
a build Id (which can be the SVN id or a Git or Mercurial SHA1)
a classic Major.Minor.Build version
For the team, you can communicate in term of build id, while in term of release management for the client, a more classic version schemes is in order.
Quite frankly, I think this one is solved. Use date and time stamps. You're version numbers then turn into readable strings that people understand.
In the off chance that you have many different builds out in the wild, each should be tagged as such. Besides a version number (which is a date and time stamp) you'd have a simple tag. Mostly these are simply debug and release. But there are a variety of other such tags that make sense, such as staging, testing, or feature/branch specific tags.
If you wanna embed metadata about your build process/environment I consider that going beyond simple versioning numbers but sometimes, very helpful.
That's about it.
Our company has a point of sale system with many extras, such as ordering and receiving functionality, sales and order history etc. Our main issue is that the system was not designed properly from the ground up, so it takes too long to make fixes and handle requests from our customers. Also, the current technology we are using (Progress database, Progress 4GL for the language) incurs quite a bit of licensing expenses on our customers due to mutli-user license fees for database connections etc.
After a lot of discussion it is looking like we will probably start over from scratch (while maintaining the current product at least for the time being). We are looking for a couple of things:
Create the system with a nice GUI front end (it is currently CHUI and the application was not built in a way that allows us to redesign the front end... no layering or separation of business logic and gui...shudder).
Create the system with the ability to modularize different functionality so the product doesn't have to include all features. This would keep the cost down for our current customers that want basic functionality and a lower price tag. The bells and whistles would be available for those that would want them.
Use proper design patterns to make the product easy to add or change any part at any time (i.e. change the database or change the front end without needing to rewrite the application or most of it). This is a problem today because the Progress 4GL code is directly compiled against the database. Small changes in the database requires lots of code recompiling.
Our new system will be Linux based, with a possibility of a client application providing functionality from one or more windows boxes.
So what I'm looking for is any suggestions on which database and/or framework or programming language(s) someone might recommend for this sort of product. Anyone that has experience in this field might be able to point us in the right direction or even have some ideas of what to avoid. We have considered .NET and SQL Express (we don't need an enterprise level DB), but that would limit us to windows (as far as I know anyway). I have heard of Mono for writing .NET code in a Linux environment, but I don't know much about it yet. We've also considered a Java and MySql based implementation.
To summarize we are looking to do the following:
Keep licensing costs down on the technology we will use to develop the product (Oracle, yikes! MySQL, nice.)
Deliver a solution that is easily maintainable and supportable.
A solution that has a component capable of running on "old" hardware through a CHUI front end. (some of our customers have 40+ terminals which would be a ton of cash in order to convert over to a PC).
Suggestions would be appreciated.
Thanks
[UPDATE]
I should note that we are currently performing a total cost analysis. This question is intended to give us a couple of "educated" options to look into to include in or analysis. Anyone who could share experiences/suggestions about client/server setups would be appreciated (not just those who have experience with point of sale systems... that would just be a bonus).
[UPDATE]
For anyone who is interested, we ended up going with Microsoft Dynamics NAV, LS Retail (a plugin for the point of sale and various other things) and then did some (and are currently working on) customization work on top of that. This setup gave us the added benefit of having a fully integrated g/l system, which our current system lacked.
Java for language (or Scala if you want to be "bleeding edge", depending on how you plan to support it and what your developers are like it might be better, but also worse)
H2 for database
Swing for GUI
Reason: Free, portable and pretty standard.
Update: Missed the part where the system should be a client-server setup. My assumption was that the database and client should run on the same machine.
I suggest you first research your constraints a bit more - you made a passing reference to a client using a particular type of terminal - this may limit your options, unless the client agrees to upgrade.
You need to do a lot more legwork on this. It's great to get opinions from web forums, but we can't possibly know your environment as well as you do.
My broad strokes advice would be to aim for technology that is widely used. This way, expertise on the platform is cheaper than "niche" technologies, and it will be easier to get help if you hit a brick wall. Of course, following this advice may not be possible if you have non-negotiable technology already in place at customers.
My second suggestion would be to complete a full project plan, with detailed specs and proper cost estimates, before going with the "rewrite from scratch" option. Right now, you're saying that it would be cheaper to rewrite the system than maintain it, and you don't really know how much it would cost to re-write.
I suggest you use browser for the UI.
Organize your application as a web application.
There are tons of options for the back-end. You can use Java + MySQL. Java backend will save you from windows/linux debate as it will run on both platforms. You won't have any licensing cost for both Java and MySQL. (Edit: Definitely there are a lot of others languages that have run-times for both linux & windows including PHP, Ruby, Python etc)
If you go this route, you may also want to consider Google Web Toolkit (GWT) for creating the browser based front-end in a modular fashion.
One word of caution though. Browsers can be pesky when it comes to memory management. In our experience, this was the most significant challenge in doing browser based POS You may want to checkout Adobe Flex that runs in browser but might be more civil in its memory management.
What is CHUI? Character-UI, as in VT terminals? Or even 3270 style?
It sounds like you need a 3-tier system - the database backend, a middle-layer that runs the bulk of the back-end business processes, and a front-end layer for the CHUI / GUI / data-gateway.
All three layers can reside on one machine; or you can distribute the tiers out to various servers. The front-end layer would control the actual terminals, whether they are VT-terminals, or a web-browser, or a custom-written 'client' application.
Make sure you have considered the hardware needs here -- are you going to have barcode scanners, cash drawers, POS debit/credit terminals, et cetra? If you are using a standard browser, it might be hard to reliably integrate those items. (At the very least, you're likely going to have to write special applets to handle them.)
Finally, consider the possibility of a thin-client technology on Windows. It greatly simplifies system management, since you only have to upgrade the software centrally. Thin-client PC's are cheap -- sub $200.
Golden Code Development (see www.goldencode.com) has a technology that does automated conversion of Progress 4GL (the schema and code... the entire application) to a Java application with a relational database backend (e.g. PostgreSQL). They currently support a very complete CHUI environment and they do refactor the code. For example, the conversion separates the UI, the data model and the business logic into separate Java classes. The entire result is a drop-in replacement that is compatible with the original (users don't need retraining, processes don't need to be modified, the data is migrated too). This is possible because they provide an application server and a set of runtime classes that provide that compatibility. The result of the automated conversion is not something that needs further editing before you can compile and run it. True terminal support is included so hardware terminals still work (it requires a small JNI library to access NCURSES from Java). All the rest of the code in the runtime is pure Java. No Progress Software Corp technology is used in the resulting system and it runs on Linux.
At least one converted system is already in production, running a 24 by 7 mission critical environment. It is a converted ERP system that their mid-sized pilot customer uses to run their entire business.