During the more than three years I spent helping Agilent Technologies migrate their Internet site from their legacy, proprietary platform to Microsoft Office SharePoint Server (MOSS) 2007, we unfortunately never used Team Foundation Server (TFS). Instead, we used Visual SourceSafe (VSS) in combination with a “Work Items” list in SharePoint that I’ve described in previous posts.
While I certainly prefer TFS over VSS, sometimes you simply have to concede that you can’t have everything you would like on a customer project and move on to actually getting the work done.
However, just because we used VSS doesn’t mean we didn’t follow good Software Configuration Management (SCM) principles. For example, as I’ve described in the past, I insist on using branching right from the start. Thus when I setup the Visual Studio solution for the Agilent project, I created a Main branch and subsequently created branches for the various releases (e.g. v1.0, v2.0, and v3.0).
The particular branch that a developer uses would thus depend on whether the changes are for the next major release or a QFE (hotfix) for the version running in Production. For example, after deploying the Technical Support site (i.e. v2.0), we began working on the “General Site” (i.e. v3.0). [Note that in Agilent’s terminology, the “General Site” essentially refers to everything outside of Technical Support, the Literature Library, and the Online Store (i.e. the “Buy” tab).]
However, since we didn’t create the v3.0 branch until shortly before the v3.0 release, all v3 (“General Site”) development was initially done on the Main branch — just like v2 (Tech Support) development was initially done in Main prior to creating the v2.0 branch.
This branching strategy works really well, regardless of which particular SCM system you actually use. The key thing to remember is that all of the changes should eventually make it into the Main branch (since that branch will eventually be used to create another branch for the next major release).
The problem with VSS is that while it certainly supports branching, the merging features, um…well, let’s just say that they leave a lot to be desired 😉
Personally speaking, I’ve never felt comfortable using the out-of-the-box merging features in VSS, and instead always insisted on merging the changes from one branch to another manually. TFS is obviously years ahead of VSS in terms of branching and merging, but as I said before, sometimes you simply have to deal with what you’ve got.
Fortunately, long before the Agilent project, I had previously created my own process that takes a great deal of the “pain” out of manually merging source code. Here is what I came up with.
In my Toolbox, I have two simple scripts: DiffBranches.cmd and CopyBranch.cmd.
Here are the contents of DiffBranches.cmd:
@echo off setlocal REM set DIFFTOOL=Windiff.exe set DIFFTOOL=C:\NotBackedUp\Public\Toolbox\DiffMerge\DiffMerge.exe set BRANCH1=%1 set BRANCH2=%2 if ("%BRANCH1%") == ("") set BRANCH1=Main if ("%BRANCH2%") == ("") set BRANCH2=v3.0 call CopyBranch.cmd "%BRANCH1%" "%BRANCH1%_tmp" call CopyBranch.cmd "%BRANCH2%" "%BRANCH2%_tmp" "%DIFFTOOL%" "%BRANCH1%_tmp" "%BRANCH2%_tmp"
As you can see, there’s not much to it. I simply make temporary copies of the two branches (i.e. by copying the branch folder into a new folder appended with “_tmp”) and then use my “Diff Tool” to compare the two folders. Originally, I used WinDiff, but once I discovered DiffMerge, I quickly switched to using it exclusively for all of my “diff’ing” activities.
The real “magic” lies in CopyBranch.cmd:
@echo off setlocal set BRANCH1=%1 set BRANCH2=%2 if ("%BRANCH1%") == ("") set BRANCH1=Main if ("%BRANCH2%") == ("") set BRANCH2="%BRANCH1%_tmp" robocopy "%BRANCH1%" "%BRANCH2%" /E /MIR /XD bin obj TestResults /XF *.scc *.suo *.user *.vspscc
Note that I put the word magic in quotes because it’s really not magic at all. When copying a source code branch, I simply use robocopy.exe and specify the following options:
|/E||Copy subdirectories, including empty ones|
|/MIR||Mirror the directory tree, thus ensuring that when I subsequently run CopyBranch.cmd, any deleted files from the original branch are removed from the “temporary” copy of the branch)|
|/XD bin obj TestResults||Exclude directories matching the given names/paths, thus skipping the compiled output (i.e. bin and obj) as well as the test results generated by running unit tests from within Visual Studio|
|/XF *.scc *.suo *.user *.vspscc||Exclude files matching the given names/paths/wildcards, thus skipping source code control files (*.scc and *.vspscc), and Visual Studio solution/project user-specific options (i.e. *.suo and *.user)|
For example, let’s suppose that I’ve checked in some changes to the v3.0 branch that need to be propagated to the Main branch. I would open a command prompt and run the following:
C:\NotBackedUp\Agilent>DiffBranches.cmd v3.0 Main
After the two branches are copied to their respective temporary folders, DiffMerge.exe is launched to compare the two branches. Since I exclude many of the directories and files that are expected to differ between the two branches, I can quickly view only the differences that I am interested in. I can even use DiffMerge.exe to apply the changes interactively (checking out the files to be updated beforehand as necessary). This greatly reduces the effort involved in manually merging changes from one branch into another.
Note that it takes a little bit of time to copy a branch the first time, but this is lightning fast on subsequent runs. Hence why I don’t delete the “_tmp” folders after comparing two branches.
I occasionally use this process even on projects where we’ve used Team Foundation Server. For example, I sometimes create a new workspace in TFS to represent a “temporary branch” where I want to experiment with some substantial changes to the source code (while I still have pending changes in my main workspace, that I may have shelved but don’t want to check-in just yet). Using a little robocopy.exe and DiffMerge.exe, I can more easily compare two branches or workspaces.