[VW] What is the best way to create Patch Parcel(s) for the deployed application ?

Hello everybody.

I work on the deployed application and once in while we do release  
updates to it using Parcels.  So far we were generating those parcel
manually out of the changes.

The steps we use today are as follow:

1. File out changes for packages/bundles.
2. Build update parcel by filing in those changes.
3. Saving and then distributing the parcel.

This method while it works OK,  has few drawbacks.

Does anybody have a better Idea how to produce updates parcels , maybe
even some code samples ?

Any Pointers are greatly appreciated.

Regards,

--Mark Pirogovsky

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Whats wrong with your current process?
you said it had some drawbacks.... what are they?



_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Well,

For one: filing out and filing in does not include method/class removal in the resulting parcels.
Second: the Parcel while are present in the vw 7.7 and up are not easily visible or available via tools.
Third: manual process is an error prone action dependent on how meticulous the person performing it is...
There maybe something else which I am forgetting now....


Jon Paynter wrote:

Whats wrong with your current process?
you said it had some drawbacks.... what are they?

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:49 AM, Mark Pirogovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:

Hello everybody.

I work on the deployed application and once in while we do release
updates to it using Parcels.  So far we were generating those parcel
manually out of the changes.

The steps we use today are as follow:

1. File out changes for packages/bundles.
2. Build update parcel by filing in those changes.
3. Saving and then distributing the parcel.

This method while it works OK,  has few drawbacks.

Does anybody have a better Idea how to produce updates parcels , maybe
even some code samples ?

Any Pointers are greatly appreciated.

Regards,

--Mark Pirogovsky

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Thanks Jon,

Your way will not work for me easily. 

Historically we did deploy out apps as single EXE on Windows or MAC with small patches delivered via parcels, and large ones - replacing the EXE.

--Mark

Jon Paynter wrote:

On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 10:09 AM, Mark Pirogovsky <[hidden email]> wrote:

Well,

For one: filing out and filing in does not include method/class removal in the resulting parcels.
Second: the Parcel while are present in the vw 7.7 and up are not easily visible or available via tools.
Third: manual process is an error prone action dependent on how meticulous the person performing it is...
There maybe something else which I am forgetting now....

Well you can try something similar to what we use here:
   First, you setup your production app to load its code from parcels on startup.
   Then patching is easy - just regenerate the parcel(s) that change, push updated parcels and either restart the production app.
Or if a restart is not possible, add something in your app that will re-load the changed parcels on demand.

_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

I also build the customized tool to create Parcels out of the named
Change sets as my first step.
I think that it is possible to add class/methods removal to the parcels,
even though they do not support it explicitly in the Parcel.
I am going to give it a try  and I will share my findings.

--Mark

Henrik wrote:
_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc

Dear Mark,

> filing out and filing in does not include method/class removal in the
> resulting parcels.

A common pattern is to remove callers of unwanted methods in patches,
accepting that the no-longer-called methods themselves will not be
removed until a larger-scale build.  (Some support practices _mandate_
not removing methods.)  Is there a technical/customer reason why removal
of methods by a patch parcel is needed, or is it organisational - if not
removed then, the task is apt to be neglected.

A specific patch parcel could remove methods or classes in postLoad, by
calling a removal method or filing in a file-out of removals.  The code
must be robust to being rerun and other error cases.

> Second: the Parcel while are present in the vw 7.7 and up are not
> easily visible or available via tools.

Do you mean Store tools;  is the issue that you have a folder of patch
parcels and no way to browse their content without loading them?

Immediately after file-out of changes from their original locations,
before file-in to patch parcel, you could publish the changed packages
as branch versions with version id related to that of the parcel you are
about to create.  You would then be able browse those versions and see
what was in the parcel.

A script to locate versions containing a given id would be needed.  The
Store workbook shows ways to use Glorp for this.

In 7.9, there will be tool support for finding such branches.

> Third: manual process is an error prone action dependent on how
> meticulous the person performing it is...

The upcoming VW 7.9 has StorePatchParcelSupport which provides one-click
behaviours for automating production of patch parcels, and for remapping
them back to the original locations of the changed methods.  I
appreciate that's not much use to you at the moment in VW7.7.

The practice of publishing branches of changed packages immediately
after filing out is one way of checking off that all changed packages
have been done.  If your image has any dirty packages, you forgot to
file-out something.

> There maybe something else which I am forgetting now....

If you recall, please post.  The information might influence 7.9 work.

HTH
                   Yours faithfully
                         Niall Ross


_______________________________________________
vwnc mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.cs.uiuc.edu/mailman/listinfo/vwnc