I'm a total newbie to SVN and haven't been able to find an answer for the following situation.
I have an ASP .NET 2.0 web app that I am developing. I am using my local IIS as the development web server (i.e. not the Visual Studio web development server). My development environment is VS2005, Vista, IIS7, TortoiseSVN / AnkhSVN. VisualSVN is installed on the server.
My .sln files and class libraries, etc. are located in the **C:\Localsource\Projects\ProjectName** folder, and my .aspx files are in my **C:\inetpub\wwwroot\ProjectName** folder.
I can set up the repository for **C:\Localsource\Projects\ProjectName** fine, but can't think of a way to set it up for the IIS folder as well in the same repository.
What's the best way for dealing with this development environment in SVN?
Many thanks,
Ant
In a solution in Visual Studio you can have a class library project which is usually in a directory underneath the .sln file.
In this case he also has a web project within the solution but NOT underneath the .sln file in the file directory structure.
He will be attaching to this project via HTTP not via local file path.
IIS will manage this as http://localhost/webapp and by default will place it in c:\inetpub\wwwroot\webapp. The files in webapp folder will not be in the repo as they arent in the hierachy of the solution and the class library. This is his question how to sort it out.
My answer is to move http://localhost/webapp to point to a folder that is underneath the .sln file and adjacent to the class library directory then it can all go in the repo.
Seperating the class library and the the webapp is best practice to aide code re-use and decoupling the logic from the web site.
Can you not just point IIS to C:\Localsource\Projects\ProjectName and set the permissions?
Hmmm - Good point. It was set up like this when I got here, and Visual Studio always creates websites in the wwwroot folder, so I assumed wwwroot was just where they had to go.
Maybe I'll have to think about doing a little rearranging...
Thanks!
The IIS folder is not the output of the code base it is part of the application. It's not CGI output or anything but actually the scripts to run the app!
This is the .aspx pages that will have user controls and HTML to actually run the application. Its part of the applciation but split away from VS Studio solution.
The easiest way is to have a solution and then C:\Localsource\Projects\ProjectName\WEBSITE.
Point IIS at that folder as well.
OK, I may be being stupid here but.. Why do you need to add the IIS folder (i.e. the output of the code base) to your repository?
Update
I think I should clarify this a bit more.. What I mean to say is I am not sure why the ASPX is seperate from the project anyway? What is wrong with an Web Project and n Class Library Projects in a Solution, added to your repository.. You then publish on each new release..
If it is simply a case of "it might be easier to roll back the published output" then so be it, I was just curious as I have not seen many people actually work that way.
Deployment of solutions in this structure would be a lot easier as well..
I think you might want to separate this into two problems, following this recommendation from Dillorscroft.
First, with regard to the material on your development server that is published to the production site, I think you need version control for that. First so you can roll back any page, and you can also decide when you have a stable level of the development site that you want to extract to production. (I would get that from the source control system into a site image and then synchronize that image with the production site.)
So, for the first part, we are talking about versioning the web pages and all of the custom server-side material that supports the web site.
Secondly, With regard to the development of components that are used on the site, they need their own development projects, since it is the result that goes to the development site, not all of the source, libraries, etc. that the component is built with. So these will have their own project development tree (think of it as if you were building a library that is to be used by other development projects, although in this case the other projects are web pages). So the only thing that should show up in IIS is the "deployed" component to the development site.
There seem to be three critical questions for you:
How development of tests that need to go against the web site is handled and where that is version controlled (assuming they do not belong on the web site itself)
How easily you can arrange to make sure that all content on the development web site is kept under version control and checked-in and -out appropriately. (This has to do with the tools you use to edit web pages and other server-side gunk other than components developed off to the side.)
Easily taking developed components from the projects that produce them to the development site and have them be checked-in there.
My solution to (2) and to version control of the development web site is to use Visual Source Safe integration with IIS and FrontPage extensions that places the site under version control. Components produced from other development projects are mapped to the server project by VSS sharing.
For SVN, I speculate that (1) you want to see if there is an SVN adapter that IIS will recognize as an external source-control system and, either way, (2) have a discipline that takes delivery of components from their construction projects into the overall web site project.
Rob,
Why do you consider an .aspx file an output of the code base?
It is part of the code base. It's not an output after compilation for instance.
Just wondered?
Related
I'm sure there's something simple I'm missing.
I'm attempting to help a buddy move his ASP site from one host to another to avoid some questionable billing practices. I usually work with PHP-based sites (Wordpress etc.) and, unfortunately, have no experience with VS or ASP.
He's temporarily moving to Godaddy on their Plesk offering temporarily until he can work out something else. He provided me with all of the files contained within his ftp (containing his site's default.asp file, header, footer etc.) as well as an archive.xml, parameters.xml, and a systemsinfo.xml file. No .snl file or anything like that.
The files did not come with a web.config file. The error I keep getting, after uploading the FTP files is "HTTP Error 502.5 - Process Failure". From my understanding, it's often related to the web.config file. And from what I understand, you can have one generated by deploying the site through VS. Problem is, I'm at a loss as to what the proper actions to deploy this project.
Plesk provides a .publish settings file, I'm just at a loss as to how to properly open this file in VS to then have it create a "web.config" file and proceed to have it publish to the hosting. Part of this is I'm unsure how to properly open a project like this in Visual Composer to then proceed with the process of setting a web.config file and going forward with the deploying.
Not knowing exactly how to open this project without an .snl file or anything, I tried creating a new project and dropping in the other files to try and set up the process that way with no luck. Considering that Plesk provides a deploy file with that information, I'm assuming if I can properly open the project, working locally, I can then go through the deploy process. I'm just at a loss as to how I can properly setup a new project with someone else project files without an .snl file or otherwise.
Any guidance that you provide would be awesome.
Thank you.
Well, if you missing basic files required to operate the site such as web.config, then you don't have the site or files required, right?
Either FTP down the existing site, or you go to the source code and VS project, and re-compile the code, and re-publish. In fact, I suggest publishing to a local simple file folder.
Even publishing to a local file folder is a good start. Now, just copy that local folder that you published from the source code project, and that published folder should work on the new site. But, really, missing files like web.config? Rather fundamental that you have ALL files of that existing published site, or you have to go back to source code project in VS and re-publish.
since that site has vb.net or c# code? Then it also not clear if the original site was a
asp.net web site
or
asp.net web site application.
Rather critical you determine the above. The reason is that for a asp.net web site application, then at publish time, all code is complied at publish time, source code is stripped out, and then you have a working site.
If this is a web site (not web site application), then all source code is in fact published to the web site, and IIS is now responsible for compiling the .net code.
but, gooly, without a web config file, you simple don't have the files for that site to work - NOT even close!!!
but, as noted, if you have the original source code and VS project, then I would of course use the source code project for the publish. As noted, you can publish via FTP, and several other ways - but I in most cases use folder/file publish to a local folder, and then that is FTP up to the site.
You also don't mention if a database is involved. But, the connection strings to the database will FOR SURE change on the new site - and that boatload of required information will of course be in the web config file.
So, what road will much depend on if you going to download the exiting site, or your going back to the original source code and Visual Studio project.
So, first step - which will take about 10 seconds of your time is to determine if this is a asp.net web site, or a asp.net web site application.
If the existing published site has the c# (or vb.net) source code, then this was/is a web site.
If the existing published site does NOT have the source code, then of course this was a asp.net web site application - and Visual Studio is responsible for compiling the code BEFORE publish.
I guess this really comes down to if you have the source code and the original project used to build the site in VS or not?
I mean, if you have the source code (not compiled) of that site and have the full project in VS, then that's your best starting point. And if that site was published asp.net web site (application), then FTP and downloading the site WILL NOT get you a working asp.net project in VS.
This is much like saying you have a some .exe program, but don't have the source code and project used to build that .exe.
Same goes for asp.net. but, as I stated, often the web site as opposed to web site application model is used, and in that case, then you would get and have the source code files by a simple FTP download. But, you don't even have the web.config file - and that makes no sense at all, since that going to exist in the current site if you download, and it would exist in the original VS project used to create that site in the first place. During a publish, we often have an additional config file that has the local database connections, and during publish, they are transformed into the correct database connections for the published site. But then again, you not even noted or mentioned if a database is involved here.
I mean, if I was handed a LAMP project (Linux, Apache, MySQL, PHP), and had to publish that site? gooly, I not worked with LAMP, but I'm sure it would be a week, or more for me to figure that out, since I'm not familiar with LAMP, and how such sites are laid out, let alone how the configuration of such a site works. Big job if the whole system, programming language and framework is something you never used before.
I know that Godaddy use Plesk control panel too. But you need to make sure that Godaddy has support .NET Core. You may refer to this post https://dotnetblog.asphostportal.com/how-to-fix-error-502-5-process-failure-asp-net-core/. I believe it will solve your issue.
So I'm using visual studio 2010 to build a website that was formerly running on PHP, so I'm pretty new to the environment.
In starting the project I built a website project, not a web application project. I know that will probably generate a lot of "never use a website project, use a web application project instead" comments, but bear with me.
I'm attempting to provide our server team with the necessary files to compile on our server for the first time. However they're used to working with web application files, not website files.
Normally they are given the source code and a batch file that compiles the code into deployment directories and then they just move the files to the server from there. I'm pretty sure that the other teams use deployment packages to do this, which obviously isn't an option for a website.
My question is, what would be the equivalent steps for getting the source for a website ready to deploy vs a web application? I have published the website to a separate folder and this has rendered what I think is the equivalent in many ways, but I wanted to make sure.
Also, is it possible to publish certain parts of a website without others?
Please with-hold all the comments about how I should be using a web application instead, google seems to assume that's all that's used out there too.
Thanks!
There isn't much to deploying a web site other than copying the source files to a directory in IIS. It will compile the site automatically on the first page request.
I agree with Britton. I personally prefer web application but with the web site project you have 2 options.
Either a) Upload all the files (including the .vb or .cs files) and the web server will compile on the fly. OR, you can publish to a separate folder locally on your machine, and then upload that folder. I would do the publish if you don't want anyone seeing your source code.
I've Googled, Binged, and here at StackOverflow, looked through the related questions and searched, but I'm not finding what I'm looking for. I've also searched documentation on DNN.
What I'm looking for is any guidance (tutorials, blogs, step-by-step instructions for setting up a repository) etc from people who are experienced in using DotNetNuke with SVN.
We use SVN for all our source control, and have no problem with standard applications, because we pretty much built the repository and directory structure to work with our processes. This means when we do web sites, in Visual Studio, we do file based web sites, rather than setting them up in the local IIS. It just makes things easier for us.
However, with DNN, it appears that even if you get the source code, it is expecting to be set up in the local IIS, which means additional headaches for us.
For example, we are moving all of our source code off our local C drives, and onto a shared drive on a server. This is to enable backups in addition to our normal source control. (This was a management decision). So that means that we need to change the virtual web app when we make the move.
Has anyone come up with a good way to work around this? Can DNN be set up so that the developer web server in Visual Studio can be used, so that we can treat it just like any normal web app? Am I missing something obvious?
Source Control
I recommend using separate projects for DotNetNuke projects (skins, modules, providers), and not checking the actual web site itself into source control environment (DNN Modules would use the WAP style project). Each developer could then have their own DotnetNuke site and database in their development environment. I also don't recommend making changes to DotNetNuke's core so that you have a clean upgrade path. I would recommend using a tool such as Red Gate's SQL Data Compare in order to generate database scripts for your data that you could keep in the source control environment as well.
Here is some more information about setting up a Web Application Project for a DotNetNuke module.
Testing/Staging/Production
Keeping these separate in DotNetNuke is generally very easy because you're already creating modules that plug into a DNN site. My recommendation is to create packaged and properly versioned modules so that you can cleanly install them on test, staging, and production.
You may want to investigate building module packages with MSBuild scripts. Alternatively, Here is some information on using NAnt to automate DNN module packaging.
Currently, I'm maintaining an older ASP.NET website. In the solution, there exists 5 C# projects which build to assemblies as well as the development server's web directory. Normally, I do whatever work needs to be done (adding pages, making changes to existing projects, etc), build the projects (the current output path is my development server's wwwroot\bin\ directory) and if all is well, I open Windows Explorer and drag either .aspx or .dll files from the dev server to the production server. It's that last step that I'm wondering if there is a better way of doing. Does anyone have a different way of doing things where you don't have to leave Visual Studio to push updates?
You should add a Web Deployment Project, that´s (in my opinion) the easiest/best way to deploy a Asp.net app
Here´s an interesting article from the MSDN Magazine. http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc163448.aspx
ASP.NET Web Site Precompilation Overview would seem to be what you are wanting, yes?
Otherwise, there are web deployment projects for VS 2005 and web deployment projects for VS 2008 if you want a couple of alternatives depending on which version of Visual Studio you use.
How old is older? Are you using ASP.Net 1.0, 1.1, or 2.0, as those are what I'd consider older, but then I've been doing web development for over a decade.
You might want to consider creating a build script and a deployment script. You can look at using either Nant or MS Build, which are popular, or simply go with a batch file approach.
Some of the reasons I suggest going with scripts are:
1. You'll never forget to push that one file that you added
2. Either your build script or your deploy script should create a copy of all the artifacts need for deployment. This way, if you push out a bad build and need to roll back for whatever reason, guess what, you have a working copy tucked away somewhere.
3. Your scripts can run the installers (if you created a setup project) or they can simply copy out the files to the correct location, so that you don't have to have your dev box pointing to the right folder.
4. Sometimes you need to make changes to the configuration before you deploy... your scripts can also do this for you.
In general automating the whole process just makes it easier, faster and repeatable.
When I use Build->Publish Web Site in Visual Studio 2008, most of the time it compiles the site, and then simply asks me "All files in the target folder will be deleted. Continue?" (or something to that effect). On occasion, however, when publishing a project in Visual Studio, I would get a dialog box that would give me the choice of replacing the folder's contents completely, or simply replacing changed files with newer version.
I much prefer to publish without completely obliterating the folder, because the deployed application creates user files and cache files as it's been used that I don't want to take extra steps to preserve. However, I'm not sure why Visual Studio doesn't always give me this option. Is this a setting somewhere I can change? Is it tied to the version of .NET I'm using?
Any insight is appreciated!
Edit - Followup on 2009-01-20
I still haven't figured this out, but here's some more information.
Here's what the publish function looks like for one ASP.NET project on my Win XP desktop:
And here's what it looks like for a different project on my Vista laptop:
Notice the radio buttons in the second screenshot that allow me to choose to either delete the contents of the folder prior to publishing, or merely to overwrite matching files. I'd like to have these options for every project.
Both computers are running Visual Studio 2008 Professional (version 9.0.30729.1 SP, according to Help->About). The exact same version. And I doubt the OS difference is causing this functionality change. It's got to be a setting somewhere, right? Does anyone know?
John is right, the only difference is one of your projects is a Web Site Project and the other is a Web Application project. You will not see the "convert to web application" option unless you are in a Web Application project. I know... it is very misleading. The reason behind this stems from the the way you convert to a web application project. If you plan on converting it(which can be a real pain in arse, depending on how it is set up) then you need to be aware of a few differences:
In a Web Application project everything is pre-compiled all the codebehind pages will be compiled into a .dll ---- In a Web Site Project nothing in the project is pre-compiled, the compiler will compile everything to ensure it is valid but none of the compiled pages are uploaded. When a user first attempts to access the site each page is compiled into its own dll. This means in a Web Site Project you are able to upload a single codebehind file.
Namespaces - In a Web Application project namespaces are created by default in a Web Site Project they are not. So you may have to spend some time adding them if you plan on converting them.
Project files - you will notice that A Website Project does not have a "cproj" file a Web Application project does.
I have converted a few of these project I find they go fairly smooth as long as there is not a lot of code in the "app_code" folder. You can give it a try and see how easy it is, if it looks like it is going to be a pain, I would suggest FileZilla just FTP it and save yourself some headache.
Good Luck
That dialog is different for Web site projects and Web application projects. In my MVC projects (Web application projects), I see the additional options. In my regular ol' web site projects, I see the first dialog posted.
Not sure if this option will be suitable for you but you could use the copy website function from the solution explorer. Click on the "Copy Website" icon at the top of the solution explorer.
I think the real answer to your question is that you should put your user files and cache files somewhere else.
When publishing a web site Visual Studio is designed to make sure that the target folder contains your web site files, and absolutely nothing else.
Apparently this feature is coming in VS2010 - that's what Vishal Joshi announced at TechEd EMEA in session "PDC307: Microsoft Visual Studio 10: Web Development Futures"
The site has been updated from the site in the updated layer.