I started working on 12c, my old soa projects are implemented using jdev 11.1.0.1.7 when I tried to open in 12c its asking to convert project to 12c compatibility, I just wanted to know what's happening on the convert project process?
Thanks,
Arun
What happens depends on the type of project.
If it's a SOA composite:
The 12c versions of the project and workspace files (*.jpr, *.jws) would at the very least have updated version numbers so that the correct 12c FMW libraries get referenced.
There might be subtle differences in the *.bpel file formats as well (e.g. the BPEL version number or XPath version might change).
On the whole, your components stay the same after migration (composite.xml, BPEL, Mediator, XSL etc.) but in 12c you get access to more (e.g. end to end JSon / Javascript support).
For OSB projects:
When you import these into 12c, the process is straightforward like SOA composites but you get significant structural changes in the project all done automatically by the 12c import/migration process (e.g. proxy and pipeline split into two separate components).
The best way to determine precise set of changes is to source control your 11g project, migrate it, then perform a diff - if you use a good source control and diff tool (which is a must anyway), you should be able to see changes in altered files and also any new files created as a result of the 12c migration.
Related
I've been working on a VS Code extension that uses Roslyn's workspace API to load a project, at the moment the extension supports .NET Core's old project.json format via the ProjectJsonWorkspace type in the Microsoft.DotNet.ProjectModel.Workspaces package.
With the new tooling changes being released soon I'm keen to support the new .csproj build format but can't appear to find a .NET Standard compliant workspace that supports it.
My understanding is that as it's using MSBuild, I will need to use the MSBuild (Microsoft.CodeAnalysis.MSBuild) package, however it does not support .NET Standard at this moment in time.
What is the best solution if one exists, or will I have to look at creating my own workspace implementation?
Having spoken with various people it appears that there is no .NET Standard compatible MS Build workspace, this can be seen by this answer below to the following GitHub issue:
We haven't done the work to make MSBuildWorkspace work properly with the new MSBuild cross-platform. In the meantime, you might look at what omnisharp does to populate it's workspace.
So it seems that at the time of writing if you want to target the MSBuild workspace in a .NET Standard compliant project then you'll need to build your own custom workspace using Roslyn's workspace API, this is exactly how OmniSharp do it.
Update (16/10/2017):
Whilst MSBuildWorkspace does still not support .NET Standard, there is a library called Buildalyzer that works cross-platform and will generate an AdhocWorkspace for you, allowing you to achieve the same goal.
using Buildalyzer.Workspaces;
// ...
AnalyzerManager manager = new AnalyzerManager();
ProjectAnalyzer analyzer =
manager.GetProject(#"C:\MyCode\MyProject.csproj");
AdhocWorkspace workspace = analyzer.GetWorkspace();
The same library will also allow you to reference a solution file too.
I'm trying to deploy a new version of a BizTalk application that contains common orchestrations for several applications (about 20 or so). The new version contains a new orchestration that will be used by several new applications.
When I try importing the msi for the new version I get an error saying:
"Cannot update assembly "[assembly_name]" because it is used by assemblies which are not in the set of assemblies to update.
To update the assembly, remove the following assemblies: "[dependant_assembly1]
[dependant_assembly2]
..."
The BizTalk server is not accessible from a development environment so the application must be updated using the BizTalk administration console. How do I import the updated application without having the remove and reinstall all 20 or so dependant applications?
Thanks
It sounds like you are deploying a new base application with the same version numbers as an existing, older version.
What works for us:
Every time you deploy a new version of your application, increment the version number (since the assemblies are GAC'ed, BTS supports side by side versioning). Any custom assemblies which are changed should also be versioned.
After deploying to your new Application to your local BizTalk, edit the resources to ensure that the correct (latest) versions of all referenced assemblies and bindings etc are up to date (remove old ones, add new ones).
Your common application will now contain both old and new versions of the assemblies. Newer versions of your 'client' applications will use the later version of your base / framework / common application.
Once all dependent applications have been upgraded, you can then remove the old version.
But the real solution seems to be to consider decoupling your applications more, e.g. by using messaging between the applications - this way, you can split out just the schemas as a common reference to the applications.
You can actually hack the deployment process on BT a little bit further than this, if you want to omit the versioning, depending on your access to the actual BT box. (Convince your sysadmin)
If you only have access to the deployment console, stop your dependent applications, remove their reference to the application you want to upgrade, and then deploy over the top, re-add your references and restart the dependent applications. You don't actually have to reinstall.This method is tedious and sucks but it will work. We do this because we have too much in our BT installs to further clutter them with multiple versions of the same app
Here is the hack. You'll need either access to the server (which I know you said you don't have) or the ability to install a service which can receive a dll and preform the below function for you. (I'm thinking you might convince someone to let you set this up) DISCLAIMER, this is not a supported solution and I claim no responsibilty blah blah blah
We do this all the time as we have WAY too many applications to do the first solution. You can slam your newly compiled DLL into the GAC. This NOT recommended by MSFT etc. but we use it in production on servers that have approx. 4000 dlls in the GAC and 1200 BT applications. You'll need to make sure that your metadata is identical i.e. you have the same version, key token etc. and you'll want to have some way of tracking your dlls outside the versioning system (we build a custom deployment infrastructure to do this). Finally once you have pushed your dlls into the GAC you'll need to restart your biztalk services. Make sure you don't have any suspended instances referencing the app you want to redeploy because they will prevent biztalk from pulling a new reference from the GAC when it restarts.
Finally it is important to note that this method will NOT work if your changes require changes in the MessageBox subscrition (things like changes in receive shape filters, correlations etc.) You will also be giving up some functionality in the orchestration debugger if you use this method to change the structure of orchs. The graphic will display the structure of the orchestration when last properly installed but your event list will be correct for the newest version. Finally, if you are replacing schema dlls you want to make doubly sure that you restart services as BT will cache schemas indefinitely.
We're in the process of streamlining/automating build, integration and unit testing as well as deployment.
Our software is developed in Visual Studio where we have use both C# and VB.NET in our projects. A single project can be contained within multiple solutions (i.e. Utils project is used in both ProductA and ProductB solutions)
For historical reasons our code repository isn't as well structured as one could have hoped for.
E.g. Utils project might be located under ProductA solution (because that's were it was first used) but it was later deemed useful for productB development and merely just included into the solution of productB (but still located in a subdirectory of productA).
I would like to use continous integration testing and have setup a CC.NET build server where I intend to use NAnt for creating the actual builds.
Question 1: How should I structure my builds on the buildserver? Should I instruct CC.NET to retrieve all the projects for productB into a single library e.g. a file structure similar to
-ProductB
--Utils
--BetterUtils
--Data
or should I opt for a filestructure similar to this
-ProductA
--Utils
-ProductB
--BetterUtils
--Data
and then just have the NAnt build scripts handle the references? Our references in VS doesn't match the actual location in the code repository so it's not possible today to just check-out productB solution and build it straight away (unfortunately). I hope this question makes sense?
Question 2: Is it better to check out all the source code located in different projects into a single file folder (whilst retaining some kind of structure) and then build every thing at once or have multiple projects in CC.NET and then let the CC.NET server handle dependencies?
Example:
Should I have a seperate project in CC.NET for monitoring the automated build/test of Utils project when it's never released on it's own? Or should I just build/test it whilst building it as part of ProductB?
I hope the above makes sense and that you can provide me with some arguments for using either option. We're nowhere near an ideal source code repository structure and I would prefer if I can resolve the lack of repository structure on the build server instead of having to clean up the structure of our repository.
Switching away from VSS is (unfortunately) not an option.
Right now our build consists of either deploying via VS clickonce or pressing F5 so just getting the build automated would be a huge step up for us.
Thanks
To answer your first question, I would recommend a separate top-level folder for each build project. The problem with having a single tree matching your source repository is that when your build server is trying to run multiple builds at once, one or more will likely fail due to files in use by other processes. Also, you may run into cases where a build script is pulling an older version of the code. In that instance you don't want a different project to accidentally use the incorrect source version.
If your solutions already reference projects from relative paths, you may end up with a structure like this:
-CCNetBuilds
--ProductASource
---Utils
---...
--ProductBSource
---ProductA
----Utils
---ProductB
----BetterUtils
----Data
In this case, the build for Product B contains part of the Product A source, at the same relative path as your solution already expects. This takes a bit more time to set up in CC.Net, but makes it easier to maintain if the developers have their code set up this way on their machines. The same solution files used in development are used by the build server.
To answer your second question, I prefer Utilities being its own build. If I have unit tests on my Utilities assembly, I would not want them to run for every single product that uses the Utilities. Also, if you have a separate build for Utilities, you can set a dependency in CC.Net so that Product A and B will not attempt to build if the Utilities build is broken. This provides a bit faster feedback that something is wrong.
In all of my other .net apps my build process (a mixture of nant and custom tasks) automatically updates the [AssemblyVersionAttribute] AssemblyInfo.cs with the current build number before the call to msbuild, stamping in the build number in the version number.
I'm now working on my first BizTalk project and I'd like to do the same thing with the version numbers of the BizTalk assemblies, but I've run into trouble!
First of all the aseembly version numbers are stored in the btproj files, so I did some googling and found www.codeplex.com/biztalk which looked like the answer to my problem, but there is a deeper problem!
I have a project for my schemas and another for my pipelines, the pipelines project references my schemas project as I have a flat file dis/assemblers. The problem comes when I update the version numbers, as updating them even from within visual studio does not update the pipeline components references to the schemas.
So if I update all the version numbers manually in the VS IDE from 1.0.0.0 to 1.1.0.0, the build fails as the pipeline components flat file dis/assemblers still reference the old 1.0.0.0 version of the schemas! They don't automatically update!
Is this really a manual process of updating the version numbers of the BizTalk projects in the property pages, then building the projects and manually updating the references to them in the properties of all the pipeline components that reference them?
This means that I can't have my build process control the build number part of my version numbers!
Or is there a better method of managing the version numbers of the BizTalk assemblies?
I'm sorry to disappoint you but I've been down the exact some road I had to give up. I guess it could be possible to achieve it but it would require a lot of changes to both the binding files and other XML files (as you mentioned and even more if you have published services etc).
Maybe it could be possible to wrap all these necessary changes in a build step (a MSBuild step or similar in other build frameworks) - that would be useful!
Developer- :)
We had the similar problem and we ended up developing a small utility which would change the version number in all the projects i.e. *.csproj (asssemblyinfo.cs), *.btproj accordingly. Apart from this it would open and modify the *.btp files with the new version of schemas. In nutshell, what all you have to do is to configure this utility in your VS.net tools menu and execute it.
I guess its not very difficult to develop such utility in any .net lanagauge.
Caveat: Do not forget to save the files after updates with the same encoding as they were originally.
Cheers!
Gutted, thought that might be the case. Maybe BizTalk 2009 projects will play more nicely when updating references when changing version numbers.
I started to go through and automate it manually, and when I realised what needed to be done, I took a biiig step back when I realised just how many places I'd have to modify to get it working. Thank god for Undo Checkout.
I do have a standard C# class library included in my project (various helper functions), which i am able to update the version number of during my build process, so I'm basically using that one assembly to version the whole application. If anyone wants to know what version is in any environment, check out the version number of that one assembly.
Not ideal, but it's working.
We've done this successfully on our project - I'll see if I can get the developer of the tool to post details...
This problem arises when you perform an integration build to the latest versions of your dependent components as file references (aka schemas here).
Keep in mind that upgrading the assemblyversion must always performed manually, that way you are always in charge of changes to assemblyversions.
A possible solution to solve the buildbreaks issue is to file reference to a specific version of a dependent component build and not to the latest version and use a subst drive and a copy script to get the latest component builds.
For example:
SchemaA, assembly version 1.0.0.0
PipelineA (with pipelinecomponent XMLValidator for example), assembly version 1.0.0.0
PipelineA has a file reference to a subst drive(say R drive, which maps to a workspace D:\MyComponents) and version 1.0.0.0 of SchemaA as follows:
R:\SchemaA\1.0.0.0\SchemaA.dll.
The copy-script copies the buildoutput of SchemaA locally to your R drive.
When schema A updates to version 1.1.0.0 you don't have any issues because you still use version 1.0.0.0 and YOU have the choice to use the 1.1.0.0 version of your schema. When you want to upgrade, you have to alter your copy-script and replace the file reference to R:\SchemaA\1.1.0.0\SchemaA.dll.
What are the strategies for versioning of a web application/ website?
I notice that here in the Beta there is an svn revision number in the footer and that's ideal for an application that uses svn over one repository. But what if you use externals or a different source control application that versions separate files?
It seems easy for a Desktop app, but I can't seem to find a suitable way of versioning for an asp.net web application.
NB I'm not sure that I have been totally clear with my question.
What I want to know is how to build and auto increment a version number for an asp.net application.
I'm not interested in how to link it with svn.
I think what you are looking for is something like this: How to auto-increment assembly version using a custom MSBuild task. It's a little old but I think it will work.
For my big apps I just use a incrementing version number id (1.0, 1.1, ...) that i store in a comment of the main file (usually index.php).
For just websites I usually just have a revision number (1,2,3,...).
I have a tendency to stick with basic integers at first (1,2,3), moving onto rational numbers (2.1, 3.13) when things get bigger...
Tried using fruit at one point, that works well for a small office. Oh, the 'banana' release? looks over in the corner "yeah... that's getting pretty old now..."
Unfortunately, confusion started to set in when the development team grew, is it an Orange, or Mandarin, or Tangelo? It looks ok. What do you mean "rotten on the inside?"
... but in all honesty. Setup a separate repository as a master, development goes on in various repositories. For every scheduled release everything is checked into the master repository so that you can quickly roll back when something goes wrong.
(I'm assuming dev/test/production are all separate servers, and dev is never allowed to touch production or the master repository....)
I maintain a system of web applications with various components that live in separate SVN repos. To be able to version track the system as a whole, I have another SVN repo which contains all other repos as external references. It also contains install / setup script(s) to deploy the whole thing. With that setup, the SVN revision number of the "metarepository" could possibly be used for versioning the complete system.
In another case, I include the SVN revision via SVN keywords in a class file that serves no other purpose (to avoid the risk of keyword substitution breaking my code). The class in that file contains a string variable that is manipulated by SVN and parsed by a class method.
An inconvenience with both approaches is that the revision number is not automatically updated by changes in the externals (approach 1) or the rest of the code (approach 2).
During internal development, I'm using milestone numbers (M1, M2, M3...). After release, I'll probably just update dates ("the January 2009 update").