DaedTech

Stories about Software

By

Cleaning Up Your Build

Today, I’d like to make a post that’s relatively short and to the point. And it’s relatively short and to the point because what I’m going to talk about is so basic and fundamental that it won’t take long to say it. It is absolutely critical that you have nothing standing between the stuff checked into your project’s source control and a completely successful build and deployment of your software.

Here’s the first thing that should absolutely be true. Someone brand new to the team should be able to take a computer with nothing special installed on it, point it at the latest good version of your project in source control, get the latest code, build it in the IDE, and be able to run your software when the build is done. If when this person runs the software, weird things happen or it crashes, you’ve failed. If this person can’t even successfully build the software, you’ve failed badly. If this person can’t even compile the software, things are really ugly. If this person can’t get the software out of source control, you’re probably using Rational Clear Case, and that poor person coming to the team has no idea what’s coming for the next months and years. Not being able to get things out of source control without jumping through hoops is total fail.

It is absolutely critical that right away, on the first day, someone can get your software from source control, build it and run it without issues. If this isn’t possible right now, make a project plan/user story/whatever for making it be possible in the future and give this a high priority. Think of yourself as a restaurant that has severe health code violations. Sure you could ignore them and continue cranking out your signature dish, “Spaghetti with Botulism,” but it’s not advisable. You need to have a clean and sanitary work environment, free from nasty cruft and residue that’s worked its way into being a normal part of your process.

Once you’ve got a “source control to runtime” path that’s pristine, you need to make sure this is also the case for deployment. You should be able to fire up a clean target machine or VM, deploy your deliverables to it in some automated fashion, and have it work. What you shouldn’t need to do is install MS Word on there or remember to copy over those six license files and that .trx thing in that one directory. Oh yeah, and a registry setting or something.

As soon as you’re doing stuff like that, you have a polluted build because you have a point of failure. You have your “automated” process and then you have the thing that you just have to remember to do every time or things go badly. If any of your process is manual, you WILL mess it up and cause problems. We’re humans and its inevitable. This is especially true if you aren’t agile and deployments happen only rarely. If you can, eliminate it as a step, but if you can’t, then automate it. Deploying should be dead simple.

And something else to bear in mind is that past sins aren’t forgiven. In other words, if you have a deployment process now that’s simple and one click and works every time with something like XCopy, that doesn’t mean you’re out of the woods. The “on a clean machine” requirement is critical. If you’re XCopying over existing files to deploy, you might have some weird one-off thing that you did to the server 2 years ago and have forgotten all about. You need to make sure you can nuke your whole deployment, redo it, and have it work.

If it sounds as though I’m being a hardliner or extremist, perhaps that’s the case, but I think it’s justifiable on this subject. You can’t negotiate with cargo cult build processes. They have to be eliminated because there is absolutely no upside and absolutely pure downside. Think about your own source control, build and deployment processes and ask yourself if there are things that need to be weeded out. And you know what? Just take a crack at it. I’ve done this sort of thing myself on a lot of different projects and I’ve always found it’s never as hard to fix the problems as you think it’s going to be. Usually it’s just that no one thinks to try.

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Daniel Rose
Guest
Daniel Rose

What do you suggest doing for third-party libraries which require an install (with a product key) for a build to work?

Erik Dietrich
Guest

Honestly, my suggestion would be to avoid or eliminate this dependency. I’ve never regretted moving away from a full blown installed product as a dependency to something designed to be included in a project. Given that this isn’t always possible, I suggest creating an installer that bootstraps or installs the product for deployment. On the build side, create an image with this software pre-installed, and use that for new developers, which provides the same feel as a clean OS (presumably you’ll have to register the product when you fire up, but that’s the only additional issue). I realize I’m painting… Read more »

Daniel Rose
Guest
Daniel Rose

In my case it is a third-party UI controls library, so it isn’t possible to eliminate the dependency. The product is licensed such that when building a project which references the library, it requires a license key. The output assemblies do not need any key or similar.
The license key is read from the registry AFAICT, so an idea might be adding a custom action which writes the license key to the registry.

Erik Dietrich
Guest

That seems like a rough way to enforce DRM for a development plugin. Sounds like the registry setting might be your best bet.

trackback

[…] => Cleaning Up Your Build […]

trackback

[…] At the very least it is in direct conflict with my firm belief that your new hire should be able to check out a project on a clean machine and have it Just Work. Either my gut feeling about standardized environments is on track or that belief is […]