We have Redmine 3.2.1 with connected SVN Repository.
On Activity page we see SVN commits like this:
"Revision XXX (our_svn): #xxx - Change in bla-bla-bla"
Is there any way to add branch and files affected by commit to this message? So it will look like this:
"Revision XXX in branch: Release 5 (our_svn): #xxx - Change in bla-bla-bla
Files affected: index.php, login.php"
To modify Redmine default functionality, you have 3 choice
Check if someone has already created plugin wich fits your needs on redmine.org and github
(preffered) Create your own plugin and upload to github so others can use it as well
(not recommended) Modify Redmine's core files, if you do this you will most likely loose compatibility with future versions
In your case I guess it would have to be a mix of 1 and 2, I would take this plugin https://github.com/efigence/redmine_show_assigned_to_activity and modify it's journal_patch.rb to include staff that you need.
Related
I'd like to ask, how may I do a migration of mappings, worklets and workflows from Informatica PowerCenter Integ, to Prod.
Integ Enviroment and Prod are in different servers, so I can't just mouve folder from folder.
Is it possible? I can't find any refernece or tutorial.
Thank you in advance.
In Powercenter, its possible to copy form one env to another. Request everyone to check in their objects first adn log off from both source and target repo.
Open Repository Manager, connect to the source repository and select the folder you want to copy.
Click Edit > Copy.
Connect to the target repository. Connect to the target repository with the same user account used to connect to the source repository. If you do not have same user you need to use deployment group/deployment folder.
In the Navigator, select the target repository, and click Edit > Paste. You will get many options like - replacing objects, use latest version, check out etc. You can follow below link to get help.
https://docs.informatica.com/data-integration/powercenter/10-5/repository-guide/copying-folders-and-deployment-groups/copying-or-replacing-a-folder/steps-to-copy-or-replace-a-folder.html
Now, my preference would be to use deployment group or deployment folder. Its easy to use and easy to control - like if you want to replace 10 objects out of 100s, or you want to create a standard process for future migrations, or deploy using command task automatically, you can do as well.
We are updating our sitecore to 8.2 and in the process I am trying to refine our source control and development workflow.
Goals
1. Have a single source of truth for support dlls, configs, lic, etc.
2. Have everything in source control that is needed to recreate the entire site from dev to prod. (excluding packages).
In order to have all of the different configs needed for the various machines I have created gulp tasks that transform the configs on build (dev, staging, prod). Those transformed configs are placed in a folder in the project that is then used to replace the originals on the target machines. This folder publishes all of its contents and seems to be working well so far.
What I don't know is how to deal with all of the config files that do not change.
Is it best to include all of those .config files in the project so that they publish? If not, then the target machine folders will have to be either manually managed (seems like a bad idea) or a script used to ensure the configs are up to date (more customization..by default not a great idea).
The only downside (that I see) to including all of the configs in the project is the weight that it would add to file searches (and that doesn't seem like a very strong argument).
Am I not seeing something?
How are you other Sitecore humans handling this?
Gregory
As a general rule of thumb, do not check in any default files into Source Control.
The main reasons are; bloat, making syncing/downloading from your source control take much longer, and upgrades, the latter being a much more important reason.
If/when you upgrade in the future, if you do not have any Sitecore files checked into source control then you can simply deploy a new/clean instance of Sitecore, fix any conflicts in your own code and then deploy on top. You don't have to try and figure out what has changed in the default install files between releases.
Any changes you need to make to Sitecore configs or settings should be made using patch files and only those custom files added to your solution.
How to handle this for deployments?
There are a few options. You could go done the scripted route, which will take a clean Sitecore install, unzip and made whatever modifications you need, then install/unzip the modules that you use in your solution one by one.
Another option maybe to create a default install with all the modules and then zip this up, then an install would be similar process to above but a more simpler case of just unzipping a single file. You could use Sitecore SIM to both install the instance, modules and then backup or do this manually.
Yet another alternative may be to check everything into Source Control, either under separate repository or a different project so ensure that all default files and configs are kept separate. If you need to upgrade in the future, simply delete the repo/project and add them back in again.
I would also do the same (a separate project) to keep all Support patches/dlls separate, again to help easily identify what fixes have been applied and to easily remove them if a future version resolves the issue.
These may add an additional step to your deploy, but keeping this separation will make your life much much easier when it comes to upgrade time.
The general guidance appears to be to install Sitecore into one folder, e.g. D:\Websites\MyWebSite and then create your Visual Studio project in a separate folder, e.g. C:\Projects\MyWebProject. You would then publish your custom code into the Sitecore folder from Visual Studio (This video explains what I’m describing https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i3Mwcphtz4w around 13 mins in).
I have the following questions:-
Do people only store their Visual Studio project in source countrol and not the Sitecore code?
The publish option from VS into the Sitecore folder only has options for adding files or deleting anything not in the VS project. How would files removed from the VS project ever get deleted without doing it manually?
We use web-deploy to publish sites to staging and live environments. In this scenario would you publish from your VS project or would you set up a way to publish the Sitecore folder (if so how)?
Is this actually a good set up to have or do you do something different?
I did a lot of research on this when we started Sitecore development a couple of years ago. I remember reading a post from Sean Kearney that made a lot of sense to me: http://seankearney.com/post/Visual-Studio-Projects-and-Sitecore
We ended up using this approach for both large and small scale projects and it has been great. You will also want to look at a couple of other tools:
Team Development for Sitecore (TDS) from Hedgehog Development (http://www.hhogdev.com/products/team-development-for-sitecore/overview.aspx)
CopySauce from Igloo (http://www.igloo.com.au/blog/copysauce-igloos-sitecore-development-utility/)
SitecoreRocks for Visual Studio
So to answer your questions:
All of your code and some of the Sitecore items are stored in source control. The approach you want to take is to only store new Sitecore items (layouts, sublayouts, templates, etc) that you create along with any items you may need to customize. You do not need to store all of the sitecore source, content or modules...just what you would need to reapply to get a fresh environment up-to-date. You can manage this manually but a tool like TDS makes this MUCH easier.
We use TDS to manage the publish/deploy to each of our environments. TDS has configurable settings for handling items that have been deleted, including the ability to move it to the Sitecore recycle bin or simply remove it. You have to be careful with this but it does work.
We use a separate build environment to assemble and run deployments using TDS and Jenkins. Basically, all of the code is retrieved from the source control system to the Sitecore server and built using MSBuild and TDS. In most cases we use a webdeploy directly to the Sitecore webroot, but for production we build TDS packages and then run them on each Content Delivery Server
We have used this setup for 7 sitecore projects so far and I am very happy with how it has worked out. We have questioned whether TDS is worth the license fee but the answer always comes back as a yes. The alternative is not very appealing for our development staff and time savings far out-weigh the costs.
Everything is stored in Source Control!... just not always in the same area as they reside on the web server. Storing the Sitecore folder in source control is a good idea as there are changes that you will have as you install modules, but you do NOT add the Sitecore folder as part of your solution/project and should really be there to pull from if need be and not something that is even tracked/monitored.
Once Sitecore is installed, create a new project that resides in the website folder and only add things like the properties folder, layouts, xml and other folders that you want. I don't even include the app_config in my project. Oh and to be clear, it's probably best to just keep the Sitecore folder as a sort of reference folder in your source control but not as part of your website trunk. We have it on the ignore list for website folder in source control. However, that being said, keep in mind that you will NEED to have it in your website folder.
Technically speaking, the recommended approach is to install Sitecore on to the server itself as a stand alone empty instance.. like using the installer with the client mode (not full) so that you get the framework for an empty site in place. Then you can create the deployment package/packages/whatever and it will all be your own code. You should really never have to mess with changing/removing the base Sitecore file system manually.
See above. Generally speaking, unless you have a reason to do so: install Sitecore as an empty instance... then manage your code/files via deployment and just leave the Sitecore folder files alone. You will have very little reason to ever touch them or the Sitecore folder itself outside of an upgrade.
Adding Sitecore itself to source control should be avoided, since you won't be deploying Sitecore as part of your implementation. For modifications to Sitecore itself, you would need a way of handling those inside your implementation, but the config patch system and other mechanisms provide the means for this.
Redundant files in the web site folder will only be a real problem in your development environment. When publishing to a demo environment or to a live environment, you will only publish the material that you actually want. And the deployment-based setup opens up the possibility of always starting from a clean Sitecore installation - as long as you include your Sitecore modifications as part of your implementation (which is not covered in the video). So there is little risk of this being a problem in real life, and the development method in the video makes eliminating this risk entirely possible.
The Sitecore installation should be handled outside of the deployment of your implementation.
It's a good setup, because the method in the video is the method Sitecore recommends for development, and it is also the method Sitecore teaches to developers in development courses. The most obvious advantages of this method are
Clean separation between your web site implementation and the Sitecore installation. There is no risk of accidentally mangling the Sitecore installation, and there is no risk of forgetting unmanaged manual modifications to Sitecore that are needed to run your site. This separation is hard to accomplish if you're not using the method in the video.
By using publishing to deploy your implementation, you know that your implementation is deployable on top of a clean Sitecore installation - and works. This means when deploying to a production or demo server in the future, things will work the same and there will be no surprises. This is very hard to be confident about if you're not using the method in the video.
To test your implementation on a different version of Sitecore, you can just deploy to a clean installation of a different version. This is very hard to test if you're not using the method in the video.
There is sample source code for the video on GitHub, along with instructions on how to set up the development environment, including the publishing parts. This sample source directly and indirectly answers some of your questions.
Is it possible to make redmine intercept the commit messages and act, like on assembla, if I commit and write fix #12 than issue 12 status changes to fix.
Any plugin for this behavior?
No plugin needed, it works the same way as it works for SVN or mercurial.
However, in order for redmine to pick up the new commit messages, you either have to open the repository page in redmine, or schedule a task to do so regularly.
as #afarazit said, plus you probably want the issues to update live in Redmine without needing to manually enter in the Repository tab to force the refresh.
That can be done by using this server-side post-receive hook:
#!/bin/bash
_apikey=YOUR_API_KEY
_projectid=YOUR_PROJECT_ID
curl -k "http://REDMINE_SERVER_URL/sys/fetch_changesets?key=$_apikey&i
d=$_projectid"&
Redmine has this functionality by default. You can use refs, references, IssueID for references and fixes, closes for fixing issues. You can also add your own keywords to be parsed from redmine and do stuff to your issues.
You can find more info on documentation
I'm attempting to get an understanding of what is a best practice / recommended setup for moving information between multiple Sitecore installations. I have a copy of Sitecore setup on my machine for development. We need a copy of the system setup for demonstration to the client and for people to enter in content prelaunch. How should I set things up so I people can enter content / modify the demonstration version of the site and still allow me to continue development on my local machine and publish my updates without overwriting changes between the systems? Or is this not the correct approach for me to be taking?
I believe that the 'publishing target' feature is what I need to use, but as this is my first project working with Sitecore and so I am looking for practical experience on how to manage this workflow.
Nathan,
You didn't specify what version of Sitecore, but I will assume 6.01+
Leveraging publishing targets will allow you to 'publish' your development Sitecore tree (or sub-trees) from your development environment to the destination, such as your QA server. However, there is potential that you publish /sitecore/content/home/* and then you wipe out your production content!
Mark mentioned using "Sitecore Packages" to move your content (as well as templates, layout items, etc...) over, which is the traditional way of moving items between environments. Also, you didn't specify what version of Sitecore you are using, but the Staging Module is not needed for Sitecore 6.3+. The Staging Module was generally used to keep file systems in sync and to clear the cache of Content Delivery servers.
However, the one piece of the puzzle that is missing here is that, you will still need to update your code (.jpg, .css, .js, .dll, .etc) on the QA box.
The optimal solution would be to have your Sitecore items (templates, layout item, rendering items, and developer owned content items) in Source control right alongside your ASP.NET Web Application and any class library projects you may have. At a basic level, you can do this using built in "Serialization" features of Sitecore. Lars Nielsen wrote an article touching on this.
To take this to the next level, you would use a tool such as Team Development for Sitecore. This tool will allow you to easily bring your Sitecore items into Visual Studio and treat them as code. At this point you could setup automated builds, or continuous integration, so that your code and Sitecore items, are automatically pushed to your QA environment. There are also configuration options to handle the scenario of keeping production content in place while still deploying developer owned items.
I recommend you looks at the staging module if you need to publish to multiple targets from the same instance, i.e. publish content from one tree over a firewall to a development site, to a QA site, etc.
If you're just migrating content from one instance to another piecemeal, you can use Sitecore packages which are standard tools to move content. The packages serialize the content to XML and zip it up and allow you to install them in other instances.