Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package #9

Weegy · 2018-06-03T11:25:02Z

NuGet Creation
Umbraco Package Creation

Kudos to @leekelleher (Boilerplate is from stacked-content)

Weegy · 2018-06-03T11:25:37Z

It includes also a Dashboard transformation for the "settings section". Test NuGet can be found here https://www.myget.org/feed/byte5digital/package/nuget/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes

mzajkowski · 2018-06-03T21:35:50Z

build/package.proj

+		<NuGetPackageName>Umbraco Backoffice Themes</NuGetPackageName>
+		<Copyright>Copyright &#169; 2018 Our Umbraco and other contributors</Copyright>
+		<Owners>Marcin Zajkowski</Owners>
+		<IconUrl>https://raw.githubusercontent.com/umco/umbraco-stacked-content/master/docs/img/logo.png</IconUrl>


We need a logo ;)

mzajkowski

Nice work! It'd be great to have another pair of eyes on it and if our amazing creator of the boilerplate (@leekelleher) can find a second to scan through it - it'll be great.

mzajkowski · 2018-06-03T21:39:37Z

build/transforms/Dashboard.config.install.xdt

+			<areas>
+				  <area>developer</area>
+			</areas>
+			<tab caption="Backend Theme">


Yeah, I like this transform. We just need to keep consistent names, so please rename it for now to "Backoffice Themes" to follow the package name. Also.. the good thing to discuss in this area is to where it should be placed, as it might be good to expose it for "normal" editors as well, not only those who has access to the Developer's section.

Fixed in latest Commit

mzajkowski · 2018-06-03T21:40:25Z

src/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes/packages.config

+  <package id="semver" version="1.1.2" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="SharpZipLib" version="0.86.0" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="System.Threading.Tasks.Dataflow" version="4.7.0" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="UmbracoCms.Core" version="7.8.0" targetFramework="net461" />


All those dependencies are coming from installation of UmbracoCms.Core?

I cleand a bit up. But these packages ares used to build the solution (normale Umbraco.Core stuff)

leekelleher

@mzajkowski I'm happy with the PR.

I've left various comments, my main concern around the AppVeyor config - auth tokens/keys, they'll need to be configured once the AppVeyor CI build is set-up.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:31:16Z

appveyor.yml

+    # MyGet Deployment for builds & releases
+  - provider: NuGet
+    server: https://www.myget.org/F/byte5digital/api/v2/package
+    symbol_server: https://www.myget.org/F/byte5digital/symbols/api/v2/package


We set-up an Umbraco community MyGet feed, (it's not just UMCO packages, Jeavon and others use it too)

server: https://www.myget.org/F/umbraco-packages/api/v2/package symbol_server: https://www.myget.org/F/umbraco-packages/symbols/api/v2/package

That's really cool. IMHO we should use this feed :)

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:32:40Z

appveyor.yml

+    server: https://www.myget.org/F/byte5digital/api/v2/package
+    symbol_server: https://www.myget.org/F/byte5digital/symbols/api/v2/package
+    api_key:
+      secure: vsHr1qAsDwPTvZV7ljoZdx2LAAuk7Xq+0vPHPFhqlPQPXinsAObb8XPLMpQoWnYW


The API key will need generating from MyGet, then encrypted on AppVeyor - depending who's AppVeyor account is used to manage the CI build. Of course this wont be known until it's all set-up/configured.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:33:39Z

appveyor.yml

+    # GitHub Deployment for releases
+  - provider: GitHub
+    auth_token:
+      secure: 


Same for this, the auth token will need to be encrypted on AppVeyor - again, this is only doable after the AppVeyor CI build is set-up.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:33:48Z

appveyor.yml

+  - provider: NuGet
+    server: 
+    api_key:
+      secure: 


(Same as above)

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:37:13Z

build/package.nuspec

+		<language></language>
+		<tags></tags>
+		<dependencies>
+			<dependency id="UmbracoCms" version="[7.8,7.11)" />


I'd set this to be [7.8,8), so that it includes all v7.8 up to v8, rather than stopping at v7.10.x last patch release.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:44:02Z

src/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes.csproj

+    <Reference Include="Semver, Version=1.1.2.0, Culture=neutral, processorArchitecture=MSIL">
+      <HintPath>..\packages\semver.1.1.2\lib\net451\Semver.dll</HintPath>
+    </Reference>
+    <Reference Include="SQLCE4Umbraco, Version=1.0.6611.19720, Culture=neutral, processorArchitecture=MSIL">


One of my bugbears with the "UmbracoCms.Core" nuget package is that it adds references to assemblies that we aren't actively using in our projects. It's an unnecessary assembly dependency.

I end up manually removing all the obvious ones (SQLCE4Umbraco, MySql.Data, etc). But if we upgrade the nuget package, then they all get added back in. I'm happy to tidy this up post-merge. (It's a boring chore on all of our projects).

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:46:18Z

src/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes/Properties/VersionInfo.cs

+using System.Runtime.CompilerServices;
+using System.Runtime.InteropServices;
+
+[assembly: AssemblyVersion("0.1-alpha.*")]


I'm not sure that this compiles? The AssemblyVersion attribute should require a valid version number - with major.minor.patch numerics.

AssemblyInformationalVersion is different... you can have any old string in there - it's purely for presentational purposes.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:47:12Z

src/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes/app.config

+        <bindingRedirect oldVersion="0.0.0.0-3.1.0.0" newVersion="3.1.0.0" />
+      </dependentAssembly>
+      <dependentAssembly>
+        <assemblyIdentity name="MySql.Data" publicKeyToken="c5687fc88969c44d" culture="neutral" />


This is the other side effect of having extra assembly dependencies (which we aren't using) ... littering up the assemblyBindings - urgh. Not ones fault, just my bugbear of the tooling.

leekelleher · 2018-06-04T14:49:37Z

src/Our.Umbraco.BackofficeThemes/packages.config

+  <package id="semver" version="1.1.2" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="SharpZipLib" version="0.86.0" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="System.Threading.Tasks.Dataflow" version="4.7.0" targetFramework="net461" />
+  <package id="UmbracoCms.Core" version="7.8.0" targetFramework="net461" />


@mzajkowski Did you have any preference on Umbraco version? My PR #6 targets v7.7.0 ... but happy to increase if desired?

Oops I merged it before reading this comment :) Basically, we can target lower version (ideally as lowest as possible) as not much has changed in terms of backoffice styling between them.

So maybe, as a part of this task/cleanup just dump a version here to 7.7 for now?

Weegy · 2018-06-04T14:55:09Z

@leekelleher Thanks for your time, I'm glad I didn't mess it up :)

mzajkowski · 2018-06-05T09:35:59Z

@Weegy please pull the latest changes from the other PR before applying any fixes :) Can't wait to see them applied and merged. We're getting there!

I'm more than happy to use this Community feed to serve the package.

@leekelleher can you advise on versioning strategy? How you're dealing with releases of alphas/betas etc?

Weegy · 2018-06-05T09:42:47Z

Merge Succesful, I will implement the other fixes ASAP

leekelleher · 2018-06-05T10:11:13Z

@mzajkowski - re: Versioning. Depends how much maintenance and discipline you want to have for the project.

Most of the UMCO projects have a branching workflow. master is only for stable/released code, (this could also be for beta releases). We have a develop branch, which is configured as our default branch, so all forks/PRs will target that by default. This means that we can separate our future dev work from releases. Then we use (internal) PRs to merge develop into master when we're ready for a new release. I can't remember if this is called GitFlow or GitHubFlow - or something else?

With version numbers, we try to stick with SemVer... Bump major for breaking-changes, bump minor for new features and bump patch for bug fixes.

On a few of our projects, I stuck with using v0.x for a while (see Ditto, NC and DTGE), because there's a clause in SemVer that says as v0.x is a pre-release and you can make any many breaking-changes as you please. Suggesting that it should never be used in production, but I think I held on to that idea for too long ... so I wouldn't recommend doing v0.x anymore.

mzajkowski · 2018-06-05T10:18:25Z

Thanks @leekelleher for your feedback.

This is similar to what we're following in most of our projects too. I was always curious about -alpha and -beta releases, but it seems like it's just a visual name for a specific release rather than strategy or something like it.

I'll try to find some time to combine it all into a small and clear CONTRIBUTING.md file with all the details about desired strategy here - maybe it'll be useful for someone else trying to work on it for the next project.

In terms of 0.x.x - I'm with you. It's nothing good to see product which is pretty stable at the market still being in 0.1.29 or something :) Let's aim to release 1.0.0 here first.

Cheers and can't wait to see @Weegy's changes applied :) Thanks for your time and hard work so far.

leekelleher · 2018-06-05T10:31:41Z

I forgot to add. With the develop branch and AppVeyor CI builds. All commits in develop are built and pushed to the MyGet feed, and all suffixed with -alpha. So we don't usually add "alpha" manually to our version numbers.

Weegy added 4 commits June 3, 2018 12:40

Added NuGet and Package Building Process

fa7b3e4

Cleanup csProj

6e53495

Clean up references to orig build files

5d351c5

Added Dashboard Transform

88800c0

This was referenced Jun 3, 2018

Readme / docs update to describe package in more detailed way #5

Open

Packaging and releasing NuGet for tests/distribution #4

Open

Weegy changed the title ~~Develop~~ Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package Jun 3, 2018

mzajkowski reviewed Jun 3, 2018

View reviewed changes

mzajkowski requested changes Jun 3, 2018

View reviewed changes

PR Clean after first review

397b901

mzajkowski mentioned this pull request Jun 4, 2018

Enhancement - stylable template/files to be supplied #8

Closed

leekelleher reviewed Jun 4, 2018

View reviewed changes

Merge remote-tracking branch 'mzajkowski/master' into develop

4eb649d

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package #9

Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package #9

Weegy commented Jun 3, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 3, 2018 •

edited

Loading

mzajkowski Jun 3, 2018

mzajkowski left a comment

mzajkowski Jun 3, 2018

Weegy Jun 4, 2018

mzajkowski Jun 3, 2018

Weegy Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher left a comment

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

Weegy Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

leekelleher Jun 4, 2018

mzajkowski Jun 5, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 4, 2018

mzajkowski commented Jun 5, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

Loading

leekelleher commented Jun 5, 2018

mzajkowski commented Jun 5, 2018

leekelleher commented Jun 5, 2018

Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package #9

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Integrate AppVeyor build for NuGet / Umbraco Package #9

Conversation

Weegy commented Jun 3, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 3, 2018 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

mzajkowski left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

leekelleher left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Weegy commented Jun 4, 2018

mzajkowski commented Jun 5, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 5, 2018 • edited Loading

leekelleher commented Jun 5, 2018

mzajkowski commented Jun 5, 2018

leekelleher commented Jun 5, 2018

Weegy commented Jun 3, 2018 •

edited

Loading

Weegy commented Jun 5, 2018 •

edited

Loading