I was working on a TFS lab deployment today and to speed up testing I set it to pick the build of the TFS build that actually builds the code, as opposed to queuing a new one each time. It took me ages to remember/realise why it kept trying to deploy some ancient build that had long since been deleted from my test system. The reason was the build means the last successful build, not the last partially successful build....
I recently posted about adding extra VMs to existing environments in Lab Management. Whilst following this process I hit a problem, I could not create my new environment there was a problem at the verify stage. It was fine adding the new VMs, but the one I was reusing gave the error ‘Microsoft test manager cannot install test agent on these machines because another environment is being created using the same machines’...
A couple of years ago I wrote about using the TFSVersion build activity to try to sync the assembly and build number. I did not want to see build names/drop location in the format ‘BuildCustomisation_20110927.17’, I wanted to see the version number in the build something like ‘BuildCustomisation 4.5.269.17’. The problem as I outlined in that post was that by fiddling with the BuildNumberFormat you could easily cause an error where duplicated drop folder names were generated, such as...
I keep forgetting when you use TFS Integration Platform that the user who the tool (or service account is running as a service) is running as has to be in the “Team Foundation Service Accounts” group on the TFS servers involved. If they are not you get a runtime conflict something like Microsoft.TeamFoundation.Migration.Tfs2010WitAdapter.PermissionException: TFS WIT bypass-rule submission is enabled. However, the migration service account ‘Richard Fennell’ is not in the Service Accounts Group on server ‘http://tfsserver:8080/tfs’....
Background Back in 2008 Martin Woodward did a post on using a Nabaztag as a build monitor for TFS, ‘Brian the build bunny’. I did a bit more work on this idea and wired into our internal build monitoring system. We ended up with a system where a build definition could be tagged so that it’s success or failure caused the Nabaztag to say a message. This all worked well until the company that made Nabaztag went out of business, the problem being all communication with your rabbit was via their web servers....