Have you customized TFS?

I’m giving a talk at TechEd 2007 about customizing TFS. As part of that talk, I’d like to reference the real world experience of our users and I’m hoping you can help me here.  So, if you or your customer has customized TFS in some interesting way, I’d love to hear about it.  This might be a unique use for work item tracking, a cool new report, innovative check in policies, or a full-fledged customized process template.  Also, if you have tips and tricks that you think I should share, please send them on too.  Based on what I receive back, I’ll post the summary back here on my blog for all to refer to. 


Comments (7)
  1. Bil Simser says:

    Hi Jeff,

    Yes, I’ve customized TFS. We took the Conchango plug-in for Scrum and further modified it by enhancing the bug logging on it (additional fields, workflows). We also went into some of the other existing fields and updated the workflow (for example when all hours for all tasks in a product backlog is completed, the product backlog is closed, when new hours are added, the product backlog item and associated sprint are set to in progress again).

  2. Hi Jeff,

    We’re in the middle of a project to evaluate TFS for use by our development teams. It looks 99.9% certain that we’ll adopt it fully in the main because of it’s extensibility. To start with, to ease the pain of moving to the new system we’ve identified common fields from various different issue tracking databases and spreadsheets and customised the Agile template to reflect these and added some additional business metrics. We’ve actually stripped a lot out of Agile to begin with, with the idea of starting off as simple as possible.

    The process editor is a joy to use. It makes changes to the templates super-easy.

  3. Thys says:

    Hi Jeff,

    Yes, we’ve customized TFS both for our internal use and for customers. We have created several new work item types with fields and workflow. Further, we have a webservice to kind of re-create the hierarchy we have in MSproject. For VS, we have an add-in to assist us in our releasemanagement/promotion management.

  4. hrboyceiii says:


    This is a really simple customization: most of our projects’ work items get customized to only allow work items to be assigned to anyone that is a member of the Project Admins, Contributors, our some other custom project group that we’ve defined has permissions to create/assign work items.

    For one project specifically, were using the continuous integration sample from the MSDN to enable builds on check-in.  Also something that’s probably more common…

    We’re also looking into using TeamPlain for web access to end-users with rights to system as well as an early upgrade to SharePoint 2007, the platform supporting our intranet site(s), to provide a more consistent experience across the organiation.

  5. We have been working on a TFSEventHandler that will allow any number of things to happen when a TFS event is fired. It is still in the alfa stages, but will integrate with Windows Workflow and we hope to offer integrated editing.


  6. Joost Broekhuizen says:

    I am finalizing our customization for TFS that automates merging in the following way:

    A work item has a new custom control that has target branches as values. In this sense the work item exists in that branch (e.a. Develop, Test, Release) and when the property of the work item is changed from Develop to Test, the related changes that are checked in are merged to the Test branch. If merging conflicts arise the user is prompted in Team Explorer with it and can decide to overide.

    Each branch has its own build process so we can generate a working environment from any branch at any give time.

    This is a valuable step in our workflow process in the sense that we have great control over what changes exist in what environment/branch and we can get specific changes to an higher branch and test only this new functionality.

  7. As I previously mentioned , I’ve been collecting data from current TFS users to understand what sorts

Comments are closed.

Skip to main content