Tech Tips

I recently, whilst changing a CI/CD release pipeline, updated what was previously a private version of a VSTS extension in the VSTS Marketplace with a version of the VSIX package set to be public. Note, in my CI/CD process I have a private and public version of each extension (set of tasks), the former is used for functional testing within the CD process, the latter is the one everyone can see. So, this meant I had two public versions of the same extension, confusing. ...

Whilst trying to install an MSI package we kept getting the errors 2755 and 1632 ‘The Temp folder is on a drive that is full or is inaccessible’. After much fiddling we found the problem was that the %systemroot%installer folder was missing. Once this was manually re-added the MSIs installed without a problem. The actual TEMP folder setting was a red herring

My existing VSTS CI/CD process has a problem that the deployment of a VSTS extension, from the moment it is uploaded to when it’s tasks are available to a build agent, is not instantiation. The process can potentially take a few minutes to roll out. The problem this delay causes is a perfect candidate for using VSTS Release Gates; using the gate to make sure the expected version of a task is available to an agent before running the next stage of the CD pipeline e.g waiting after deploying a private build of an extension before trying to run functional tests. The problem is how to achieve this with the current VSTS gate options? ...

I am currently looking at the best way to migrate a large legacy codebase from TFVC to Git. There are a number of ways I could do this, as I have posted about before. Obviously, I have ruled out anything that tries to migrate history as ‘that way hell lies’; if people need to see history they will be able to look at the archived TFVC instance. TFVC and Git are just too different in the way they work to make history migrations worth the effort in my opinion. ...

Background Having automated builds is essential to any good development process. Irrespective of the build engine in use, VSTS, Jenkins etc. you need to have a means to create the VMs that are running the builds. You can of course do this by hand, but in many ways you are just extending the old ‘it works on my PC – the developer can build it only on their own PC’ problem i.e. it is hard to be sure what version of tools are in use. This is made worse by the fact it is too tempting for someone to remote onto the build VM to update some SDK or tool without anyone else’s knowledge. ...

I wrote a post recently Versioning your ARM templates within a VSTS CI/CD pipeline. I realised since writing it that it does not address the issue of if you wish to version your ARM Templates using Semantic Versioning. My JSON versioning task I used did not support the option of not extracting a numeric version number e.g. 1.2.3.4 from a VSTS build number. To address this limitation I have modified my Version JSON file task to address. This change to my task allows it to be used with the GitVersion VSTS task to manage the semantic versioning. For more details on GitVersion see the project documentation. Hence, I my now able to generate a version number using GitVersion and pass this in to the versioning task directly using a build variable. ...

As part of the continued improvement to my CI/CD process I needed to provide a means so that whenever I test my Generate Release Notes Task, within it’s CI/CD process, new commits and work item associations are made. This is required because the task only picks up new commits and work items since the last successful running of a given build. So if the last release of the task extension was successful then the next set of tests have no associations to go in the release notes, not exactly exercising all the code paths! In the past I added this test data by hand, a new manual commit to the repo prior to a release; but why have a dog and bark yourself? Better to automate the process. This can done using a PowerShell file, run inline or stored in the builds source repo and run within a VSTS build. The code is shown below, you can pass in the required parameters, but I set sensible default for my purposes ...

Whist adding a couple of new tasks to my VSTS Manifest Versioning Extension I hit the problem that VSIX package became too big to upload to the Marketplace. The error I saw in my CI/CD VSTS pipeline was``` ##vso[task.logissue type=error;]error: Failed Request: Bad Request(400) - The extension package size ‘23255292 bytes’ exceeds the maximum package size ‘20971520 bytes’ 1. They get a list of files 2. Extract a version number from the build number 3. Then apply this to one or more files in a product/task specific manner there has been some cut and paste coding. This means that I have NPM modules in the tasks **package.json** file that were not needed for a given task. I could manually address this but there is an NPM module to help, DepCheck. First install the [DepCheck](https://www.npmjs.com/package/depcheck) module``` npm install depcheck –g ```then run **depcheck** from the command line whist within your task’s folder. This returns a list of modules listed in the **package.json** that are not referenced in the code files. These can then be removed from the **package.json.** e.g. I saw``` Unused dependencies \* @types/node \* @types/q \* Buffer \* fs \* request \* tsd Unused devDependencies \* @types/chai \* @types/mocha \* @types/node \* mocha-junit-reporter \* ts-loader \* ts-node \* typings ```The important ones to focus on are the first block (non-development references), as these are the ones that are packaged with the production code in the VSIX; I was already pruning the **node\_module** folder of development dependencies prior to creating the VSIX to remove devDependancies using the command``` npm prune –production ```I did find some of the listed modules strange, as I knew they really were needed and a quick test of removing them did show the code failed if they were missing. These are what [depchecks documentation calls false alerts](https://www.npmjs.com/package/depcheck). I found I could remove the **@type/xxx** and **tsd** references, which were the big ones, that are only needed in development when working in TypeScript. Once these were removed for all four of my NodeJS based tasks my VSIX dropped in size from 22Mb to 7Mb. So problem solved.

Background I have recently been posting on using Azure to host private VSTS build/release agents to avoid agent queue deadlocking issues with more complex release pipelines. One of the areas discussed is reducing cost of running a private agent in Azure by only running the private agent within a limited time range, when you guess it might be needed. I have done this using DevTest Labs Auto Start and Auto Stop features. This works, but is it not better to only start the agent VM when it is actually really needed, not when you guess it might be? I need this private agent only when working on my VSTS extensions, not something I do everyday. Why waste CPU cycles that are never used? ...

In my last post I discussed creating a private VSTS build agent within an Azure DevTest Lab on a VM with no GUI. It was pointed out to me today, by Rik Hepworth, that I had overlooked an obvious alternative way to get the VSTS agent onto the VM i.e. not having to use a series of commands at an RDP connected command prompt. The alternative I missed is to use a DevTest Lab Artifact; in fact there is such an artifact available within the standard set in DevTest Labs. You just provide a few parameters and you are good to go. Well you should be good to go, but there is an issue. The PowerShell used to extract the downloaded Build Agent ZIP file does not work on a non-UI based Windows VM. The basic issue here is discussed in this post by my fellow ALM MVP Ricci Gian Maria. Luckily the fix is simple; I just used the same code to do the extraction of the ZIP file that I used in my previous post. I have submitted this fix as a Pull Request to the DevTest Lab Team so hopefully the standard repository will have the fix soon and you won’t need to do a fork to create a private artifacts repo as I have. Update 1st December 2017 The Pull Request to the DevTest Lab Team with the fixed code has been accepted and the fix is now in the master branch of the public artifact repo, so automatically available to all ...