Search Results

Search found 24784 results on 992 pages for 'process integration packs'.

Page 140/992 | < Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >

  • How do I free SQLServerCE's COM instance from the current running process?

    - by David Thornley
    It's been a while since I touched COM so be nice ;) This is under WindowsCE 5.0 with SQLServerCE 2.0. After calling this to load SQLServerCE 2.0 : - IDBInitialize *pIDBInitialize = NULL; CoCreateInstance(CLSID_SQLSERVERCE_2_0, NULL, CLSCTX_INPROC_SERVER, IID_IDBInitialize, (void**)&pIDBInitialize); Module load occurs for SSCE20.dll which obviously loads the SQLServerCE engine into the process space. What I don't understand is if I do this immediately after :- pIDBInitialize->Release(); I don't see a dll module unload, so that SSCE20.dll (and friends) are still loaded into my process. Now I tried CoFreeUnusedLibraries() which I figure forces COM to purge any unused libraries, but it doesn't seem to do the trick. At runtime I want to be able to completely unload the SQLServerCE 2.0 dll from the process to streamline an upgrade to 3.5SP1. I suspect this has something to do with the shared dll model that Microsoft use under WindowsCE... but, I might be wrong :) Thanks in advance, David.

    Read the article

  • Is it possible to force an error in an Integration Services data flow to demonstrate its rollback?

    - by Matt
    I have been tasked with demoing how Integration Services handles an error during a data flow to show that no data makes it into the destination. This is an existing package and I want to limit the code changes to the package as much as possible (since this is most likely a one time deal). The scenario that is trying to be understood is a "systemic" failure - the source file disappears midstream, or the file server loses power, etc. I know I can make this happen by having the Error Output of the source set to Failure and introducing bad data but I would like to do something lighter than that. I suppose I could add a Script Transform task and look for a certain value and throw an error but I was hoping someone has come up with something easier / more elegant. Thanks, Matt

    Read the article

  • Creating a process in a non-zero session from a service in windows-2008-server?

    - by Itay Levin
    Hi, I was wondering if there is a simple way for a service to create a process in user session? My service is running as a user(administrator) account and not as a LocalSystem acount, therefore i can't use the WTSQueryUserToken function. i have tried calling OpenProcessToken(GetCurrentProcess,TOKEN_ALL_ACCESS,TokenHandle); but when i use this token to run CreateProcessAsUser(TokenHandle,.....) my process is still running in session 0. how can i resolve this issue? I'm using an Ole automation so i don't really care on which session the process will be running on, as long it is not the session 0 - because the Ole from some reason doesn't create its processes (winword.exe for instance) in session 0, but rather it creates them in other user sessions. Any suggestions will be welcome. Thanks in advance.

    Read the article

  • Why does PowerShell fail to build my .net solutions? ("file is being used by another process")

    - by urig
    I've written a PowerShell script to build several .net solutions one after the other. It simply makes several calls to csc.exe to build the .sln files. Almost every time I run the script one of the solutions fails to build and CSC.exe reports: error CS1606: Assembly signing failed; output may not be signed -- The process cannot access the file because it is being used by another process. This happens even though I've closed all instances of Visual Studio holding these solutions and I've none of their exes running on mu machine. A similar batch file that I've written works just fine. It's only PowerShell that complains about the file being used by another process. How can avoid having this happen? Are there any better examples out there of building .net solutions through PowerShell?

    Read the article

  • How can I find which process has opened a specific file?

    - by Hosam Aly
    How can I find which processes have a specific file opened, and their open, access and share modes? Additionally, is it possible to change these values for a process? Or is it even possible to open a file for reading if it is already opened for exclusive access by another process? Please note that I don't want to invalidate the handle of the process having the file opened. I just want to be able to access the file (if possible). (I'm mainly asking about Windows, but solutions for other platforms are welcome, since they contribute to the community's knowledge.) Edit: I found some answers for my first question here and there. Edit 2: Thanks everybody for the tools you mentioned, but I am mainly looking for programmatical techniques (e.g. using Win32 APIs).

    Read the article

  • How to find all the file handles by a process programmatically?

    - by kumar
    I have a process "x" which uses "system" C function to start ntpd daemon. I observed that ntpd are passed the open file descriptors of "x". ntpd holds on to the file descriptors even after original file is deleted. for ex: Some log files used by "x" are rotated out after sometime, but "ntpd" has file handle opened for these deleted files. Will it cause any problem? Alternatively I thought of setting "FD_CLOEXEC" flag for all the file descriptors before calling "system" function. But as we are running as an extension library to third process "x"( "x" loads our library based on some condition), there is no easy way to know about all the file descriptors process has opened. One way is to read /proc//fd and set "FD_CLOEXEC" for each file handle and reset it back after "system" function returns. I'm using Linux 2.16. Is there any other easy way to find all the file handlers? Thanks,

    Read the article

  • how to open multiple projects into the CAST IRON integration tool?

    - by Mishal
    Hi, I am learning the cast iron tool which is widely used now a days for integration purpose,but i can only open 1 project and if i want to open the other project at the same time than i have to close the 1st project and open the 2nd project. So many times i need to have to open the 2 projects at the same time but i dont know in which way i can open the projects ? can any body give me any urgent solution for the same to open the multiple projects at the same time and to switch between them ? Thanks, Mishal Shah

    Read the article

  • How do I get the output of Win32::Process command in Perl?

    - by rockyurock
    I am using use Win32::Process for my application run as below. It runs fine, but I did not get any way to get the output to a .txt file. I used NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS rather than CREATE_NEW_CONSOLE to get the output on the same terminal itself, but I don't know how to redirect it to a txt file. /rocky #!/usr/bin/perl use strict; use warnings; use Win32::Process; Win32::Process::Create(my $ProcessObj, "iperf.exe", "iperf.exe -u -s -p 5001", 0, NORMAL_PRIORITY_CLASS, ".") || die ErrorReport(); my @command_output; push @command_output,$ProcessObj; open FILE, ">zz.txt" or die $!; print FILE @command_output; close FILE; sleep 10; $ProcessObj->Kill(0); sub ErrorReport{ print Win32::FormatMessage( Win32::GetLastError() ); }

    Read the article

  • How to easily pass a very long string to a worker process under Windows?

    - by sharptooth
    My native C++ Win32 program spawns a worker process and needs to pass a huge configuration string to it. Currently it just passes the string as a command line to CreateProcess(). The problem is the string is getting longer and now it doesn't fit into the 32K characters limitation imposed by Windows. Of course I could do something like complicating the worker process start - I use the RPC server in it anyway and I could introduce an RPC request for passing the configuration string, but this will require a lot of changes and make the solution not so reliable. Saving the data into a file for passing is also not very elegant - the file could be left on the filesystem and become garbage. What other simple ways are there for passing long strings to a worker process started by my program on Windows?

    Read the article

  • Scriptom (groovy) leaves Excel process running - am I doing something wrong?

    - by Alex Stoddard
    I am using the Scriptom extension to Groovy 1.7.0 to automate some processing using Excel 2007 under Windows XP. This always seems to leave an Excel process running despite my calling quit on the excel activeX object. (There is a passing reference to this phenomenon in the Scriptom example documentation too.) Code looks like: import org.codehaus.groovy.scriptom.ActiveXObject; def xls = new ActiveXObject("Excel.Application") xls.Visible = true // do xls stuff xls.Quit() The visible excel window does disappear but an EXCEL process is left in the task manager (and more processes pile up with each run of the script). There are no error message or exceptions. Can anyone explain why the Excel process is left behind and is there any way to prevent it from happening?

    Read the article

  • Is registering your app through iTunesConnect required to test GameKit integration?

    - by Dan K.
    I'd like to add GameKit integration to my app. I was hoping to be able to evaluate how it works. From the docs I found, it seems that I have to register my app through iTunes Connect first. I'm new to the iOS development front, so maybe I'm wrong here, but it seems like registering your app in iTunes Connect is a pretty final step, and I'd like to be able to test things before going through that step. So, I guess I have two questions: 1.) Do I have to register my app with iTunes Connect before being able to use GameKit? 2.) Am I being crazy about not wanting to register with iTunes Connect yet? Should I stop worrying and just do it?

    Read the article

  • JPA DAO integration test not throwing exception when duplicate object saved?

    - by HDave
    I am in the process of unit testing a DAO built with Spring/JPA and Hibernate as the provider. Prior to running the test, DBUnit inserted a User record with username "poweruser" -- username is the primary key in the users table. Here is the integration test method: @Test @ExpectedException(EntityExistsException.class) public void save_UserTestDataSaveUserWithPreExistingId_EntityExistsException() { User newUser = new UserImpl("poweruser"); newUser.setEmail("[email protected]"); newUser.setFirstName("New"); newUser.setLastName("User"); newUser.setPassword("secret"); dao.persist(newUser); } I have verified that the record is in the database at the start of this method. Not sure if this is relevant, but if I do a dao.flush() at the end of this method I get the following exception: javax.persistence.PersistenceException: org.hibernate.exception.ConstraintViolationException: Could not execute JDBC batch update

    Read the article

  • Can I prevent a user from using windows taskmanager to end a process?

    - by Russ
    I have a c# 4.0 application that I hear grumblings and rumors about problems with. Now, this application has a global unhandled exception handler that reports back to me with errors. I also know that it works because SOME people fill it in, and submit it. It seems though; that a large number of people do NOT fill it in, but instead, use the Windows Taskmanager to end the process. Is it possible to prevent a user from using the Windows Taskmanager to end a specific process? My goal would be that if the application crashes, the form that the user is presented with prevents the process from being ended. I'll also accept steps that would prevent the Windows Taskmanager from being launched.

    Read the article

  • How do I disable maven build when using Maven 2.0 integration for eclipse?

    - by Stein G. Strindhaug
    How do I stop the "Maven 2.0 integration" plugin from running maven build, while keeping "build automatically" checked? I'm pretty sure it used to be some check box to disable maven build before, but after upgrading Ubuntu; eclipse seems to have been updated in the process, and now I cannot find any way to turn off the maven build. The maven build takes literally minutes (about 5 minutes or so), while just running java build used to finish in seconds. Is it no longer possible to disable it or have they just hidden it well? If it's not possible, will eclipse be able to compile my maven project without the plugin? (Trying to google for a solution the closes I got to an answer was several archives of this old post where the answer essentially were "You should be able to disable Maven builder in project preferences..." which doesn't really help because I cannot find any on/off settings there)

    Read the article

  • How do I propagate an exception thrown by croak in forked child to parent/foreground process?

    - by Pedro Silva
    Throwing an exception via croak in a forked child process seems to print the error as a background process would. That is, it clobbers the shell prompt. If I die instead of croak, the the error message pops up as a foreground process. I've trying to find out why that is in the Carp documentation without any luck. Here's what I mean. The croak version: $ perl Wrapper.pm $ error: ... does not exist at Wrapper.pm line 624 The die version: $ perl Wrapper.pm error: ... does not exist at Wrapper.pm line 515. I tried trapping the fork and printing $@ to STDERR and exiting, but that didn't have an effect. Any ideas? I'd like to be able to use croak in this particular case.

    Read the article

  • What's the correct way to represent a linear process in CocoaTouch (UIKit)?

    - by UloPe
    I need to represent a linear process (think wizard) in an iPad app. In principle I could use a UINavigationController and just keep pushing new controllers for each step of the process. But this seems rather inefficient since the process I'm modeling has no notion of navigating backwards so all previous views would pointlessly stay around and use up resources. At the moment I keep adding and removing a subview to one "master" viewcontroller and basically swapping out the contents. This works but feels rather clunky and I hope there is some nicer way to achieve this. Additionally there needs to be an animated transition between the views. (I have this working at the moment via beginAnimations / commitAnimations)

    Read the article

  • Can I prevent a user from using windows task manager to end a process?

    - by Russ
    I have a c# 4.0 application that I hear grumblings and rumors about problems with. Now, this application has a global unhandled exception handler that reports back to me with errors. I also know that it works because SOME people fill it in, and submit it. It seems though; that a large number of people do NOT fill it in, but instead, use the Windows Taskmanager to end the process. Is it possible to prevent a user from using the Windows Taskmanager to end a specific process? My goal would be that if the application crashes, the form that the user is presented with prevents the process from being ended. I'll also accept steps that would prevent the Windows Taskmanager from being launched. I know I have seen some processes come up with an "Access Denied" prompt when I try to kill it in TaskManager, however I suspect that the windows team has made this very difficult, if not impossible to achieve.

    Read the article

  • How do I find out which process is locking a file using .NET?

    - by AJ
    I've seen several of answers about using Handle or Process Monitor, but I would like to be able to find out in my own code (C#) which process is locking a file. I have a nasty feeling that I'm going to have to spelunk around in the win32 API, but if anyone has already done this and can put me on the right track, I'd really appreciate the help. Update Links to similar questions How does one figure out what process locked a file using c#? Command line tool Across a Network Locking a USB device Unit test fails with locked file deleting locked file

    Read the article

  • In a SQL XDL File, how do I read the waitresource attribute on process nodes which are deadlocking?

    - by skimania
    On SQL Server 2005, I'm getting a deadlock when updating two different keys in the same table. note from below that these two waitresources have the same beginning part, but different ending parts. waitresource="KEY: 6:72057594090487808 (d900ed5a6cc6)" and waitresource="KEY: 6:72057594090487808 (d900fb5261bb)" These two keys are locking, and I need to figure out why. The question: If the values in parenthesis are different, why are the first half of the key's the same? <deadlock-list> <deadlock victim="processffffffff8f5863e8"> <process-list> <process id="processaf02f8" taskpriority="0" logused="0" waitresource="KEY: 6:72057594090487808 (d900fb5261bb)" waittime="2281" ownerId="1370264705" transactionname="user_transaction" lasttranstarted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.483" XDES="0x69453a70" lockMode="U" schedulerid="3" kpid="7624" status="suspended" spid="339" sbid="0" ecid="0" priority="0" transcount="2" lastbatchstarted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.483" lastbatchcompleted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.483" clientapp=".Net SqlClient Data Provider" hostname="RISKBBG_VM" hostpid="5848" loginname="RiskOpt" isolationlevel="read committed (2)" xactid="1370264705" currentdb="6" lockTimeout="4294967295" clientoption1="671088672" clientoption2="128056"> <executionStack> <frame procname="MKP_RISKDB.dbo.MarketDataCurrentRtUpload" line="14" stmtstart="840" stmtend="1220" sqlhandle="0x03000600005f9d24c8878f00849d00000100000000000000"> UPDATE c WITH (ROWLOCK) SET LastUpdate = t.LastUpdate, Value = t.Value, Source = t.Source FROM MarketDataCurrent c INNER JOIN #TEMPTABLE2 t ON c.MDID = t.mdid; -- Insert new MDID </frame> <frame procname="adhoc" line="1" sqlhandle="0x010006004a58132228bf8d73000000000000000000000000"> MarketDataCurrentBlbgRtUpload </frame> </executionStack> <inputbuf> MarketDataCurrentBlbgRtUpload </inputbuf> </process> <process id="processffffffff8f5863e8" taskpriority="0" logused="0" waitresource="KEY: 6:72057594090487808 (d900ed5a6cc6)" waittime="2281" ownerId="1370264646" transactionname="user_transaction" lasttranstarted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.450" XDES="0x1cb72be8" lockMode="U" schedulerid="5" kpid="1880" status="suspended" spid="287" sbid="0" ecid="0" priority="0" transcount="2" lastbatchstarted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.450" lastbatchcompleted="2010-06-17T00:35:25.450" clientapp=".Net SqlClient Data Provider" hostname="RISKAPPS_VM" hostpid="1424" loginname="RiskOpt" isolationlevel="read committed (2)" xactid="1370264646" currentdb="6" lockTimeout="4294967295" clientoption1="671088672" clientoption2="128056"> <executionStack> <frame procname="MKP_RISKDB.dbo.MarketDataCurrent_BulkUpload" line="28" stmtstart="1062" stmtend="1720" sqlhandle="0x03000600a28e5e4ef4fd8e00849d00000100000000000000"> UPDATE c WITH (ROWLOCK) SET LastUpdate = getdate(), Value = t.Value, Source = @source FROM MarketDataCurrent c INNER JOIN #MDTUP t ON c.MDID = t.mdid WHERE c.lastUpdate &lt; @updateTime and c.mdid not in (select mdid from MarketData where BloombergTicker is not null and PriceSource like &apos;Live.%&apos;) and c.value &lt;&gt; t.value </frame> <frame procname="adhoc" line="1" stmtstart="88" sqlhandle="0x01000600c1653d0598706ca7000000000000000000000000"> exec MarketDataCurrent_BulkUpload @clearBefore, @source </frame> <frame procname="unknown" line="1" sqlhandle="0x000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000"> unknown </frame> </executionStack> <inputbuf> (@clearBefore datetime,@source nvarchar(10))exec MarketDataCurrent_BulkUpload @clearBefore, @source </inputbuf> </process> </process-list> <resource-list> <keylock hobtid="72057594090487808" dbid="6" objectname="MKP_RISKDB.dbo.MarketDataCurrent" indexname="PK_MarketDataCurrent" id="lock64ac7940" mode="U" associatedObjectId="72057594090487808"> <owner-list> <owner id="processffffffff8f5863e8" mode="U"/> </owner-list> <waiter-list> <waiter id="processaf02f8" mode="U" requestType="wait"/> </waiter-list> </keylock> <keylock hobtid="72057594090487808" dbid="6" objectname="MKP_RISKDB.dbo.MarketDataCurrent" indexname="PK_MarketDataCurrent" id="lockffffffffb8d2dd40" mode="U" associatedObjectId="72057594090487808"> <owner-list> <owner id="processaf02f8" mode="U"/> </owner-list> <waiter-list> <waiter id="processffffffff8f5863e8" mode="U" requestType="wait"/> </waiter-list> </keylock> </resource-list> </deadlock> </deadlock-list>

    Read the article

  • What is the purpose of Process class in Java?

    - by Nitesh Panchal
    Runtime objRuntime = Runtime.getRuntime(); String strBackupString = "mysqldump -u " + userName + " -p" + password + " " + dbName; Process objProcess = objRuntime.exec(strBackupString); This is used for backup of database. But what exactly happens? Can anybody make me explain, what is the purpose of Runtime and Process class? Is this class used to act as if we are typing command from command prompt? Then what should i pass to objRuntime.exec() if i want to open notepad? And is the command executed as soon as we call exec method? If yes, then what purpose does Process serve here? I really can't understand these two classes. Please make me understand. Thanks in advance :)

    Read the article

  • TerminateProcess and deadlocks

    - by Tony
    Is it real that the TerminateProcess function in Windows could hang because the threads inside the process were stuck in a deadlock? Example: Process A is running under Process B's control, now Process A gets into a deadlock and Process B detects this and decides to 'Kill' process A using TerminateProcess. Would it be successful in killing the hung Process A?

    Read the article

  • Guidance: A Branching strategy for Scrum Teams

    - by Martin Hinshelwood
    Having a good branching strategy will save your bacon, or at least your code. Be careful when deviating from your branching strategy because if you do, you may be worse off than when you started! This is one possible branching strategy for Scrum teams and I will not be going in depth with Scrum but you can find out more about Scrum by reading the Scrum Guide and you can even assess your Scrum knowledge by having a go at the Scrum Open Assessment. You can also read SSW’s Rules to Better Scrum using TFS which have been developed during our own Scrum implementations. Acknowledgements Bill Heys – Bill offered some good feedback on this post and helped soften the language. Note: Bill is a VS ALM Ranger and co-wrote the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Willy-Peter Schaub – Willy-Peter is an ex Visual Studio ALM MVP turned blue badge and has been involved in most of the guidance including the Branching Guidance for TFS 2010 Chris Birmele – Chris wrote some of the early TFS Branching and Merging Guidance. Dr Paul Neumeyer, Ph.D Parallel Processes, ScrumMaster and SSW Solution Architect – Paul wanted to have feature branches coming from the release branch as well. We agreed that this is really a spin-off that needs own project, backlog, budget and Team. Scenario: A product is developed RTM 1.0 is released and gets great sales.  Extra features are demanded but the new version will have double to price to pay to recover costs, work is approved by the guys with budget and a few sprints later RTM 2.0 is released.  Sales a very low due to the pricing strategy. There are lots of clients on RTM 1.0 calling out for patches. As I keep getting Reverse Integration and Forward Integration mixed up and Bill keeps slapping my wrists I thought I should have a reminder: You still seemed to use reverse and/or forward integration in the wrong context. I would recommend reviewing your document at the end to ensure that it agrees with the common understanding of these terms merge (forward integration) from parent to child (same direction as the branch), and merge  (reverse integration) from child to parent (the reverse direction of the branch). - one of my many slaps on the wrist from Bill Heys.   As I mentioned previously we are using a single feature branching strategy in our current project. The single biggest mistake developers make is developing against the “Main” or “Trunk” line. This ultimately leads to messy code as things are added and never finished. Your only alternative is to NEVER check in unless your code is 100%, but this does not work in practice, even with a single developer. Your ADD will kick in and your half-finished code will be finished enough to pass the build and the tests. You do use builds don’t you? Sadly, this is a very common scenario and I have had people argue that branching merely adds complexity. Then again I have seen the other side of the universe ... branching  structures from he... We should somehow convince everyone that there is a happy between no-branching and too-much-branching. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   A key benefit of branching for development is to isolate changes from the stable Main branch. Branching adds sanity more than it adds complexity. We do try to stress in our guidance that it is important to justify a branch, by doing a cost benefit analysis. The primary cost is the effort to do merges and resolve conflicts. A key benefit is that you have a stable code base in Main and accept changes into Main only after they pass quality gates, etc. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft The second biggest mistake developers make is branching anything other than the WHOLE “Main” line. If you branch parts of your code and not others it gets out of sync and can make integration a nightmare. You should have your Source, Assets, Build scripts deployment scripts and dependencies inside the “Main” folder and branch the whole thing. Some departments within MSFT even go as far as to add the environments used to develop the product in there as well; although I would not recommend that unless you have a massive SQL cluster to house your source code. We tried the “add environment” back in South-Africa and while it was “phenomenal”, especially when having to switch between environments, the disk storage and processing requirements killed us. We opted for virtualization to skin this cat of keeping a ready-to-go environment handy. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft   I think people often think that you should have separate branches for separate environments (e.g. Dev, Test, Integration Test, QA, etc.). I prefer to think of deploying to environments (such as from Main to QA) rather than branching for QA). - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   You can read about SSW’s Rules to better Source Control for some additional information on what Source Control to use and how to use it. There are also a number of branching Anti-Patterns that should be avoided at all costs: You know you are on the wrong track if you experience one or more of the following symptoms in your development environment: Merge Paranoia—avoiding merging at all cost, usually because of a fear of the consequences. Merge Mania—spending too much time merging software assets instead of developing them. Big Bang Merge—deferring branch merging to the end of the development effort and attempting to merge all branches simultaneously. Never-Ending Merge—continuous merging activity because there is always more to merge. Wrong-Way Merge—merging a software asset version with an earlier version. Branch Mania—creating many branches for no apparent reason. Cascading Branches—branching but never merging back to the main line. Mysterious Branches—branching for no apparent reason. Temporary Branches—branching for changing reasons, so the branch becomes a permanent temporary workspace. Volatile Branches—branching with unstable software assets shared by other branches or merged into another branch. Note   Branches are volatile most of the time while they exist as independent branches. That is the point of having them. The difference is that you should not share or merge branches while they are in an unstable state. Development Freeze—stopping all development activities while branching, merging, and building new base lines. Berlin Wall—using branches to divide the development team members, instead of dividing the work they are performing. -Branching and Merging Primer by Chris Birmele - Developer Tools Technical Specialist at Microsoft Pty Ltd in Australia   In fact, this can result in a merge exercise no-one wants to be involved in, merging hundreds of thousands of change sets and trying to get a consolidated build. Again, we need to find a happy medium. - Willy-Peter Schaub on Merge Paranoia Merge conflicts are generally the result of making changes to the same file in both the target and source branch. If you create merge conflicts, you will eventually need to resolve them. Often the resolution is manual. Merging more frequently allows you to resolve these conflicts close to when they happen, making the resolution clearer. Waiting weeks or months to resolve them, the Big Bang approach, means you are more likely to resolve conflicts incorrectly. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Main line, this is where your stable code lives and where any build has known entities, always passes and has a happy test that passes as well? Many development projects consist of, a single “Main” line of source and artifacts. This is good; at least there is source control . There are however a couple of issues that need to be considered. What happens if: you and your team are working on a new set of features and the customer wants a change to his current version? you are working on two features and the customer decides to abandon one of them? you have two teams working on different feature sets and their changes start interfering with each other? I just use labels instead of branches? That's a lot of “what if’s”, but there is a simple way of preventing this. Branching… In TFS, labels are not immutable. This does not mean they are not useful. But labels do not provide a very good development isolation mechanism. Branching allows separate code sets to evolve separately (e.g. Current with hotfixes, and vNext with new development). I don’t see how labels work here. - Bill Heys, VS ALM Ranger & TFS Branching Lead, Microsoft   Figure: Creating a single feature branch means you can isolate the development work on that branch.   Its standard practice for large projects with lots of developers to use Feature branching and you can check the Branching Guidance for the latest recommendations from the Visual Studio ALM Rangers for other methods. In the diagram above you can see my recommendation for branching when using Scrum development with TFS 2010. It consists of a single Sprint branch to contain all the changes for the current sprint. The main branch has the permissions changes so contributors to the project can only Branch and Merge with “Main”. This will prevent accidental check-ins or checkouts of the “Main” line that would contaminate the code. The developers continue to develop on sprint one until the completion of the sprint. Note: In the real world, starting a new Greenfield project, this process starts at Sprint 2 as at the start of Sprint 1 you would have artifacts in version control and no need for isolation.   Figure: Once the sprint is complete the Sprint 1 code can then be merged back into the Main line. There are always good practices to follow, and one is to always do a Forward Integration from Main into Sprint 1 before you do a Reverse Integration from Sprint 1 back into Main. In this case it may seem superfluous, but this builds good muscle memory into your developer’s work ethic and means that no bad habits are learned that would interfere with additional Scrum Teams being added to the Product. The process of completing your sprint development: The Team completes their work according to their definition of done. Merge from “Main” into “Sprint1” (Forward Integration) Stabilize your code with any changes coming from other Scrum Teams working on the same product. If you have one Scrum Team this should be quick, but there may have been bug fixes in the Release branches. (we will talk about release branches later) Merge from “Sprint1” into “Main” to commit your changes. (Reverse Integration) Check-in Delete the Sprint1 branch Note: The Sprint 1 branch is no longer required as its useful life has been concluded. Check-in Done But you are not yet done with the Sprint. The goal in Scrum is to have a “potentially shippable product” at the end of every Sprint, and we do not have that yet, we only have finished code.   Figure: With Sprint 1 merged you can create a Release branch and run your final packaging and testing In 99% of all projects I have been involved in or watched, a “shippable product” only happens towards the end of the overall lifecycle, especially when sprints are short. The in-between releases are great demonstration releases, but not shippable. Perhaps it comes from my 80’s brain washing that we only ship when we reach the agreed quality and business feature bar. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft Although you should have been testing and packaging your code all the way through your Sprint 1 development, preferably using an automated process, you still need to test and package with stable unchanging code. This is where you do what at SSW we call a “Test Please”. This is first an internal test of the product to make sure it meets the needs of the customer and you generally use a resource external to your Team. Then a “Test Please” is conducted with the Product Owner to make sure he is happy with the output. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: If you find a deviation from the expected result you fix it on the Release branch. If during your final testing or your “Test Please” you find there are issues or bugs then you should fix them on the release branch. If you can’t fix them within the time box of your Sprint, then you will need to create a Bug and put it onto the backlog for prioritization by the Product owner. Make sure you leave plenty of time between your merge from the development branch to find and fix any problems that are uncovered. This process is commonly called Stabilization and should always be conducted once you have completed all of your User Stories and integrated all of your branches. Even once you have stabilized and released, you should not delete the release branch as you would with the Sprint branch. It has a usefulness for servicing that may extend well beyond the limited life you expect of it. Note: Don't get forced by the business into adding features into a Release branch instead that indicates the unspoken requirement is that they are asking for a product spin-off. In this case you can create a new Team Project and branch from the required Release branch to create a new Main branch for that product. And you create a whole new backlog to work from.   Figure: When the Team decides it is happy with the product you can create a RTM branch. Once you have fixed all the bugs you can, and added any you can’t to the Product Backlog, and you Team is happy with the result you can create a Release. This would consist of doing the final Build and Packaging it up ready for your Sprint Review meeting. You would then create a read-only branch that represents the code you “shipped”. This is really an Audit trail branch that is optional, but is good practice. You could use a Label, but Labels are not Auditable and if a dispute was raised by the customer you can produce a verifiable version of the source code for an independent party to check. Rare I know, but you do not want to be at the wrong end of a legal battle. Like the Release branch the RTM branch should never be deleted, or only deleted according to your companies legal policy, which in the UK is usually 7 years.   Figure: If you have made any changes in the Release you will need to merge back up to Main in order to finalise the changes. Nothing is really ever done until it is in Main. The same rules apply when merging any fixes in the Release branch back into Main and you should do a reverse merge before a forward merge, again for the muscle memory more than necessity at this stage. Your Sprint is now nearly complete, and you can have a Sprint Review meeting knowing that you have made every effort and taken every precaution to protect your customer’s investment. Note: In order to really achieve protection for both you and your client you would add Automated Builds, Automated Tests, Automated Acceptance tests, Acceptance test tracking, Unit Tests, Load tests, Web test and all the other good engineering practices that help produce reliable software.     Figure: After the Sprint Planning meeting the process begins again. Where the Sprint Review and Retrospective meetings mark the end of the Sprint, the Sprint Planning meeting marks the beginning. After you have completed your Sprint Planning and you know what you are trying to achieve in Sprint 2 you can create your new Branch to develop in. How do we handle a bug(s) in production that can’t wait? Although in Scrum the only work done should be on the backlog there should be a little buffer added to the Sprint Planning for contingencies. One of these contingencies is a bug in the current release that can’t wait for the Sprint to finish. But how do you handle that? Willy-Peter Schaub asked an excellent question on the release activities: In reality Sprint 2 starts when sprint 1 ends + weekend. Should we not cater for a possible parallelism between Sprint 2 and the release activities of sprint 1? It would introduce FI’s from main to sprint 2, I guess. Your “Figure: Merging print 2 back into Main.” covers, what I tend to believe to be reality in most cases. - Willy-Peter Schaub, VS ALM Ranger, Microsoft I agree, and if you have a single Scrum team then your resources are limited. The Scrum Team is responsible for packaging and release, so at least one run at stabilization, package and release should be included in the Sprint time box. If more are needed on the current production release during the Sprint 2 time box then resource needs to be pulled from Sprint 2. The Product Owner and the Team have four choices (in order of disruption/cost): Backlog: Add the bug to the backlog and fix it in the next Sprint Buffer Time: Use any buffer time included in the current Sprint to fix the bug quickly Make time: Remove a Story from the current Sprint that is of equal value to the time lost fixing the bug(s) and releasing. Note: The Team must agree that it can still meet the Sprint Goal. Cancel Sprint: Cancel the sprint and concentrate all resource on fixing the bug(s) Note: This can be a very costly if the current sprint has already had a lot of work completed as it will be lost. The choice will depend on the complexity and severity of the bug(s) and both the Product Owner and the Team need to agree. In this case we will go with option #2 or #3 as they are uncomplicated but severe bugs. Figure: Real world issue where a bug needs fixed in the current release. If the bug(s) is urgent enough then then your only option is to fix it in place. You can edit the release branch to find and fix the bug, hopefully creating a test so it can’t happen again. Follow the prior process and conduct an internal and customer “Test Please” before releasing. You can read about how to conduct a Test Please on our Rules to Successful Projects: Do you conduct an internal "test please" prior to releasing a version to a client?   Figure: After you have fixed the bug you need to ship again. You then need to again create an RTM branch to hold the version of the code you released in escrow.   Figure: Main is now out of sync with your Release. We now need to get these new changes back up into the Main branch. Do a reverse and then forward merge again to get the new code into Main. But what about the branch, are developers not working on Sprint 2? Does Sprint 2 now have changes that are not in Main and Main now have changes that are not in Sprint 2? Well, yes… and this is part of the hit you take doing branching. But would this scenario even have been possible without branching?   Figure: Getting the changes in Main into Sprint 2 is very important. The Team now needs to do a Forward Integration merge into their Sprint and resolve any conflicts that occur. Maybe the bug has already been fixed in Sprint 2, maybe the bug no longer exists! This needs to be identified and resolved by the developers before they continue to get further out of Sync with Main. Note: Avoid the “Big bang merge” at all costs.   Figure: Merging Sprint 2 back into Main, the Forward Integration, and R0 terminates. Sprint 2 now merges (Reverse Integration) back into Main following the procedures we have already established.   Figure: The logical conclusion. This then allows the creation of the next release. By now you should be getting the big picture and hopefully you learned something useful from this post. I know I have enjoyed writing it as I find these exploratory posts coupled with real world experience really help harden my understanding.  Branching is a tool; it is not a silver bullet. Don’t over use it, and avoid “Anti-Patterns” where possible. Although the diagram above looks complicated I hope showing you how it is formed simplifies it as much as possible.   Technorati Tags: Branching,Scrum,VS ALM,TFS 2010,VS2010

    Read the article

  • The broken Promise of the Mobile Web

    - by Rick Strahl
    High end mobile devices have been with us now for almost 7 years and they have utterly transformed the way we access information. Mobile phones and smartphones that have access to the Internet and host smart applications are in the hands of a large percentage of the population of the world. In many places even very remote, cell phones and even smart phones are a common sight. I’ll never forget when I was in India in 2011 I was up in the Southern Indian mountains riding an elephant out of a tiny local village, with an elephant herder in front riding atop of the elephant in front of us. He was dressed in traditional garb with the loin wrap and head cloth/turban as did quite a few of the locals in this small out of the way and not so touristy village. So we’re slowly trundling along in the forest and he’s lazily using his stick to guide the elephant and… 10 minutes in he pulls out his cell phone from his sash and starts texting. In the middle of texting a huge pig jumps out from the side of the trail and he takes a picture running across our path in the jungle! So yeah, mobile technology is very pervasive and it’s reached into even very buried and unexpected parts of this world. Apps are still King Apps currently rule the roost when it comes to mobile devices and the applications that run on them. If there’s something that you need on your mobile device your first step usually is to look for an app, not use your browser. But native app development remains a pain in the butt, with the requirement to have to support 2 or 3 completely separate platforms. There are solutions that try to bridge that gap. Xamarin is on a tear at the moment, providing their cross-device toolkit to build applications using C#. While Xamarin tools are impressive – and also *very* expensive – they only address part of the development madness that is app development. There are still specific device integration isssues, dealing with the different developer programs, security and certificate setups and all that other noise that surrounds app development. There’s also PhoneGap/Cordova which provides a hybrid solution that involves creating local HTML/CSS/JavaScript based applications, and then packaging them to run in a specialized App container that can run on most mobile device platforms using a WebView interface. This allows for using of HTML technology, but it also still requires all the set up, configuration of APIs, security keys and certification and submission and deployment process just like native applications – you actually lose many of the benefits that  Web based apps bring. The big selling point of Cordova is that you get to use HTML have the ability to build your UI once for all platforms and run across all of them – but the rest of the app process remains in place. Apps can be a big pain to create and manage especially when we are talking about specialized or vertical business applications that aren’t geared at the mainstream market and that don’t fit the ‘store’ model. If you’re building a small intra department application you don’t want to deal with multiple device platforms and certification etc. for various public or corporate app stores. That model is simply not a good fit both from the development and deployment perspective. Even for commercial, big ticket apps, HTML as a UI platform offers many advantages over native, from write-once run-anywhere, to remote maintenance, single point of management and failure to having full control over the application as opposed to have the app store overloads censor you. In a lot of ways Web based HTML/CSS/JavaScript applications have so much potential for building better solutions based on existing Web technologies for the very same reasons a lot of content years ago moved off the desktop to the Web. To me the Web as a mobile platform makes perfect sense, but the reality of today’s Mobile Web unfortunately looks a little different… Where’s the Love for the Mobile Web? Yet here we are in the middle of 2014, nearly 7 years after the first iPhone was released and brought the promise of rich interactive information at your fingertips, and yet we still don’t really have a solid mobile Web platform. I know what you’re thinking: “But we have lots of HTML/JavaScript/CSS features that allows us to build nice mobile interfaces”. I agree to a point – it’s actually quite possible to build nice looking, rich and capable Web UI today. We have media queries to deal with varied display sizes, CSS transforms for smooth animations and transitions, tons of CSS improvements in CSS 3 that facilitate rich layout, a host of APIs geared towards mobile device features and lately even a number of JavaScript framework choices that facilitate development of multi-screen apps in a consistent manner. Personally I’ve been working a lot with AngularJs and heavily modified Bootstrap themes to build mobile first UIs and that’s been working very well to provide highly usable and attractive UI for typical mobile business applications. From the pure UI perspective things actually look very good. Not just about the UI But it’s not just about the UI - it’s also about integration with the mobile device. When it comes to putting all those pieces together into what amounts to a consolidated platform to build mobile Web applications, I think we still have a ways to go… there are a lot of missing pieces to make it all work together and integrate with the device more smoothly, and more importantly to make it work uniformly across the majority of devices. I think there are a number of reasons for this. Slow Standards Adoption HTML standards implementations and ratification has been dreadfully slow, and browser vendors all seem to pick and choose different pieces of the technology they implement. The end result is that we have a capable UI platform that’s missing some of the infrastructure pieces to make it whole on mobile devices. There’s lots of potential but what is lacking that final 10% to build truly compelling mobile applications that can compete favorably with native applications. Some of it is the fragmentation of browsers and the slow evolution of the mobile specific HTML APIs. A host of mobile standards exist but many of the standards are in the early review stage and they have been there stuck for long periods of time and seem to move at a glacial pace. Browser vendors seem even slower to implement them, and for good reason – non-ratified standards mean that implementations may change and vendor implementations tend to be experimental and  likely have to be changed later. Neither Vendors or developers are not keen on changing standards. This is the typical chicken and egg scenario, but without some forward momentum from some party we end up stuck in the mud. It seems that either the standards bodies or the vendors need to carry the torch forward and that doesn’t seem to be happening quickly enough. Mobile Device Integration just isn’t good enough Current standards are not far reaching enough to address a number of the use case scenarios necessary for many mobile applications. While not every application needs to have access to all mobile device features, almost every mobile application could benefit from some integration with other parts of the mobile device platform. Integration with GPS, phone, media, messaging, notifications, linking and contacts system are benefits that are unique to mobile applications and could be widely used, but are mostly (with the exception of GPS) inaccessible for Web based applications today. Unfortunately trying to do most of this today only with a mobile Web browser is a losing battle. Aside from PhoneGap/Cordova’s app centric model with its own custom API accessing mobile device features and the token exception of the GeoLocation API, most device integration features are not widely supported by the current crop of mobile browsers. For example there’s no usable messaging API that allows access to SMS or contacts from HTML. Even obvious components like the Media Capture API are only implemented partially by mobile devices. There are alternatives and workarounds for some of these interfaces by using browser specific code, but that’s might ugly and something that I thought we were trying to leave behind with newer browser standards. But it’s not quite working out that way. It’s utterly perplexing to me that mobile standards like Media Capture and Streams, Media Gallery Access, Responsive Images, Messaging API, Contacts Manager API have only minimal or no traction at all today. Keep in mind we’ve had mobile browsers for nearly 7 years now, and yet we still have to think about how to get access to an image from the image gallery or the camera on some devices? Heck Windows Phone IE Mobile just gained the ability to upload images recently in the Windows 8.1 Update – that’s feature that HTML has had for 20 years! These are simple concepts and common problems that should have been solved a long time ago. It’s extremely frustrating to see build 90% of a mobile Web app with relative ease and then hit a brick wall for the remaining 10%, which often can be show stoppers. The remaining 10% have to do with platform integration, browser differences and working around the limitations that browsers and ‘pinned’ applications impose on HTML applications. The maddening part is that these limitations seem arbitrary as they could easily work on all mobile platforms. For example, SMS has a URL Moniker interface that sort of works on Android, works badly with iOS (only works if the address is already in the contact list) and not at all on Windows Phone. There’s no reason this shouldn’t work universally using the same interface – after all all phones have supported SMS since before the year 2000! But, it doesn’t have to be this way Change can happen very quickly. Take the GeoLocation API for example. Geolocation has taken off at the very beginning of the mobile device era and today it works well, provides the necessary security (a big concern for many mobile APIs), and is supported by just about all major mobile and even desktop browsers today. It handles security concerns via prompts to avoid unwanted access which is a model that would work for most other device APIs in a similar fashion. One time approval and occasional re-approval if code changes or caches expire. Simple and only slightly intrusive. It all works well, even though GeoLocation actually has some physical limitations, such as representing the current location when no GPS device is present. Yet this is a solved problem, where other APIs that are conceptually much simpler to implement have failed to gain any traction at all. Technically none of these APIs should be a problem to implement, but it appears that the momentum is just not there. Inadequate Web Application Linking and Activation Another important piece of the puzzle missing is the integration of HTML based Web applications. Today HTML based applications are not first class citizens on mobile operating systems. When talking about HTML based content there’s a big difference between content and applications. Content is great for search engine discovery and plain browser usage. Content is usually accessed intermittently and permanent linking is not so critical for this type of content.  But applications have different needs. Applications need to be started up quickly and must be easily switchable to support a multi-tasking user workflow. Therefore, it’s pretty crucial that mobile Web apps are integrated into the underlying mobile OS and work with the standard task management features. Unfortunately this integration is not as smooth as it should be. It starts with actually trying to find mobile Web applications, to ‘installing’ them onto a phone in an easily accessible manner in a prominent position. The experience of discovering a Mobile Web ‘App’ and making it sticky is by no means as easy or satisfying. Today the way you’d go about this is: Open the browser Search for a Web Site in the browser with your search engine of choice Hope that you find the right site Hope that you actually find a site that works for your mobile device Click on the link and run the app in a fully chrome’d browser instance (read tiny surface area) Pin the app to the home screen (with all the limitations outline above) Hope you pointed at the right URL when you pinned Even for you and me as developers, there are a few steps in there that are painful and annoying, but think about the average user. First figuring out how to search for a specific site or URL? And then pinning the app and hopefully from the right location? You’ve probably lost more than half of your audience at that point. This experience sucks. For developers too this process is painful since app developers can’t control the shortcut creation directly. This problem often gets solved by crazy coding schemes, with annoying pop-ups that try to get people to create shortcuts via fancy animations that are both annoying and add overhead to each and every application that implements this sort of thing differently. And that’s not the end of it - getting the link onto the home screen with an application icon varies quite a bit between browsers. Apple’s non-standard meta tags are prominent and they work with iOS and Android (only more recent versions), but not on Windows Phone. Windows Phone instead requires you to create an actual screen or rather a partial screen be captured for a shortcut in the tile manager. Who had that brilliant idea I wonder? Surprisingly Chrome on recent Android versions seems to actually get it right – icons use pngs, pinning is easy and pinned applications properly behave like standalone apps and retain the browser’s active page state and content. Each of the platforms has a different way to specify icons (WP doesn’t allow you to use an icon image at all), and the most widely used interface in use today is a bunch of Apple specific meta tags that other browsers choose to support. The question is: Why is there no standard implementation for installing shortcuts across mobile platforms using an official format rather than a proprietary one? Then there’s iOS and the crazy way it treats home screen linked URLs using a crazy hybrid format that is neither as capable as a Web app running in Safari nor a WebView hosted application. Moving off the Web ‘app’ link when switching to another app actually causes the browser and preview it to ‘blank out’ the Web application in the Task View (see screenshot on the right). Then, when the ‘app’ is reactivated it ends up completely restarting the browser with the original link. This is crazy behavior that you can’t easily work around. In some situations you might be able to store the application state and restore it using LocalStorage, but for many scenarios that involve complex data sources (like say Google Maps) that’s not a possibility. The only reason for this screwed up behavior I can think of is that it is deliberate to make Web apps a pain in the butt to use and forcing users trough the App Store/PhoneGap/Cordova route. App linking and management is a very basic problem – something that we essentially have solved in every desktop browser – yet on mobile devices where it arguably matters a lot more to have easy access to web content we have to jump through hoops to have even a remotely decent linking/activation experience across browsers. Where’s the Money? It’s not surprising that device home screen integration and Mobile Web support in general is in such dismal shape – the mobile OS vendors benefit financially from App store sales and have little to gain from Web based applications that bypass the App store and the cash cow that it presents. On top of that, platform specific vendor lock-in of both end users and developers who have invested in hardware, apps and consumables is something that mobile platform vendors actually aspire to. Web based interfaces that are cross-platform are the anti-thesis of that and so again it’s no surprise that the mobile Web is on a struggling path. But – that may be changing. More and more we’re seeing operations shifting to services that are subscription based or otherwise collect money for usage, and that may drive more progress into the Web direction in the end . Nothing like the almighty dollar to drive innovation forward. Do we need a Mobile Web App Store? As much as I dislike moderated experiences in today’s massive App Stores, they do at least provide one single place to look for apps for your device. I think we could really use some sort of registry, that could provide something akin to an app store for mobile Web apps, to make it easier to actually find mobile applications. This could take the form of a specialized search engine, or maybe a more formal store/registry like structure. Something like apt-get/chocolatey for Web apps. It could be curated and provide at least some feedback and reviews that might help with the integrity of applications. Coupled to that could be a native application on each platform that would allow searching and browsing of the registry and then also handle installation in the form of providing the home screen linking, plus maybe an initial security configuration that determines what features are allowed access to for the app. I’m not holding my breath. In order for this sort of thing to take off and gain widespread appeal, a lot of coordination would be required. And in order to get enough traction it would have to come from a well known entity – a mobile Web app store from a no name source is unlikely to gain high enough usage numbers to make a difference. In a way this would eliminate some of the freedom of the Web, but of course this would also be an optional search path in addition to the standard open Web search mechanisms to find and access content today. Security Security is a big deal, and one of the perceived reasons why so many IT professionals appear to be willing to go back to the walled garden of deployed apps is that Apps are perceived as safe due to the official review and curation of the App stores. Curated stores are supposed to protect you from malware, illegal and misleading content. It doesn’t always work out that way and all the major vendors have had issues with security and the review process at some time or another. Security is critical, but I also think that Web applications in general pose less of a security threat than native applications, by nature of the sandboxed browser and JavaScript environments. Web applications run externally completely and in the HTML and JavaScript sandboxes, with only a very few controlled APIs allowing access to device specific features. And as discussed earlier – security for any device interaction can be granted the same for mobile applications through a Web browser, as they can for native applications either via explicit policies loaded from the Web, or via prompting as GeoLocation does today. Security is important, but it’s certainly solvable problem for Web applications even those that need to access device hardware. Security shouldn’t be a reason for Web apps to be an equal player in mobile applications. Apps are winning, but haven’t we been here before? So now we’re finding ourselves back in an era of installed app, rather than Web based and managed apps. Only it’s even worse today than with Desktop applications, in that the apps are going through a gatekeeper that charges a toll and censors what you can and can’t do in your apps. Frankly it’s a mystery to me why anybody would buy into this model and why it’s lasted this long when we’ve already been through this process. It’s crazy… It’s really a shame that this regression is happening. We have the technology to make mobile Web apps much more prominent, but yet we’re basically held back by what seems little more than bureaucracy, partisan bickering and self interest of the major parties involved. Back in the day of the desktop it was Internet Explorer’s 98+%  market shareholding back the Web from improvements for many years – now it’s the combined mobile OS market in control of the mobile browsers. If mobile Web apps were allowed to be treated the same as native apps with simple ways to install and run them consistently and persistently, that would go a long way to making mobile applications much more usable and seriously viable alternatives to native apps. But as it is mobile apps have a severe disadvantage in placement and operation. There are a few bright spots in all of this. Mozilla’s FireFoxOs is embracing the Web for it’s mobile OS by essentially building every app out of HTML and JavaScript based content. It supports both packaged and certified package modes (that can be put into the app store), and Open Web apps that are loaded and run completely off the Web and can also cache locally for offline operation using a manifest. Open Web apps are treated as full class citizens in FireFoxOS and run using the same mechanism as installed apps. Unfortunately FireFoxOs is getting a slow start with minimal device support and specifically targeting the low end market. We can hope that this approach will change and catch on with other vendors, but that’s also an uphill battle given the conflict of interest with platform lock in that it represents. Recent versions of Android also seem to be working reasonably well with mobile application integration onto the desktop and activation out of the box. Although it still uses the Apple meta tags to find icons and behavior settings, everything at least works as you would expect – icons to the desktop on pinning, WebView based full screen activation, and reliable application persistence as the browser/app is treated like a real application. Hopefully iOS will at some point provide this same level of rudimentary Web app support. What’s also interesting to me is that Microsoft hasn’t picked up on the obvious need for a solid Web App platform. Being a distant third in the mobile OS war, Microsoft certainly has nothing to lose and everything to gain by using fresh ideas and expanding into areas that the other major vendors are neglecting. But instead Microsoft is trying to beat the market leaders at their own game, fighting on their adversary’s terms instead of taking a new tack. Providing a kick ass mobile Web platform that takes the lead on some of the proposed mobile APIs would be something positive that Microsoft could do to improve its miserable position in the mobile device market. Where are we at with Mobile Web? It sure sounds like I’m really down on the Mobile Web, right? I’ve built a number of mobile apps in the last year and while overall result and response has been very positive to what we were able to accomplish in terms of UI, getting that final 10% that required device integration dialed was an absolute nightmare on every single one of them. Big compromises had to be made and some features were left out or had to be modified for some devices. In two cases we opted to go the Cordova route in order to get the integration we needed, along with the extra pain involved in that process. Unless you’re not integrating with device features and you don’t care deeply about a smooth integration with the mobile desktop, mobile Web development is fraught with frustration. So, yes I’m frustrated! But it’s not for lack of wanting the mobile Web to succeed. I am still a firm believer that we will eventually arrive a much more functional mobile Web platform that allows access to the most common device features in a sensible way. It wouldn't be difficult for device platform vendors to make Web based applications first class citizens on mobile devices. But unfortunately it looks like it will still be some time before this happens. So, what’s your experience building mobile Web apps? Are you finding similar issues? Just giving up on raw Web applications and building PhoneGap apps instead? Completely skipping the Web and going native? Leave a comment for discussion. Resources Rick Strahl on DotNet Rocks talking about Mobile Web© Rick Strahl, West Wind Technologies, 2005-2014Posted in HTML5  Mobile   Tweet !function(d,s,id){var js,fjs=d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0];if(!d.getElementById(id)){js=d.createElement(s);js.id=id;js.src="//platform.twitter.com/widgets.js";fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js,fjs);}}(document,"script","twitter-wjs"); (function() { var po = document.createElement('script'); po.type = 'text/javascript'; po.async = true; po.src = 'https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js'; var s = document.getElementsByTagName('script')[0]; s.parentNode.insertBefore(po, s); })();

    Read the article

  • The Changing Face of PASS

    - by Bill Graziano
    I’m starting my sixth year on the PASS Board.  I served two years as the Program Director, two years as the Vice-President of Marketing and I’m starting my second year as the Executive Vice-President of Finance.  There’s a pretty good chance that if PASS has done something you don’t like or is doing something you don’t like, that I’m involved in one way or another. Andy Leonard asked in a comment on his blog if the Board had ever reversed itself based on community input.  He asserted that it hadn’t.  I disagree.  I’m not going to try and list all the changes we make inside portfolios based on feedback from and meetings with the community.  I’m going to focus on major governance issues since I was elected to the Board. Management Company The first big change was our management company.  Our old management company had a standard approach to running a non-profit.  It worked well when PASS was launched.  Having a ready-made structure and process to run the organization enabled the organization to grow quickly.  As time went on we were limited in some of the things we wanted to do.  The more involved you were with PASS, the more you saw these limitations.  Key volunteers were regularly providing feedback that they wanted certain changes that were difficult for us to accomplish.  The Board at that time wanted changes that were difficult or impossible to accomplish under that structure. This was not a simple change.  Imagine a $2.5 million dollar company letting all its employees go on a Friday and starting with a new staff on Monday.  We also had a very narrow window to accomplish that so that we wouldn’t affect the Summit – our only source of revenue.  We spent the year after the change rebuilding processes and putting on the Summit in Denver.  That’s a concrete example of a huge change that PASS made to better serve its members.  And it was a change that many in the community were telling us we needed to make. Financials We heard regularly from our members that they wanted our financials posted.  Today on our web site you can find audited financials going back to 2004.  We publish our budget at the start of each year.  If you ask a question about the financials on the PASS site I do my best to answer it.  I’m also trying to do a better job answering financial questions posted in other locations.  (And yes, I know I owe a few of you some blog posts.) That’s another concrete example of a change that our members asked for that the Board agreed was a good decision. Minutes When I started on the Board the meeting minutes were very limited.  The minutes from a two day Board meeting might fit on one page.  I think we did the bare minimum we were legally required to do.  Today Board meeting minutes run from 5 to 12 pages and go into incredible detail on what we talk about.  There are certain topics that are NDA but where possible we try to list the topic we discussed but that the actual discussion was under NDA.  We also publish the agenda of Board meetings ahead of time. This is another specific example where input from the community influenced the decision.  It was certainly easier to have limited minutes but I think the extra effort helps our members understand what’s going on. Board Q&A At the 2009 Summit the Board held its first public Q&A with our members.  We’d always been available individually to answer questions.  There’s a benefit to getting us all in one room and asking the really hard questions to watch us squirm.  We learn what questions we don’t have good answers for.  We get to see how many people in the crowd look interested in the various questions and answers. I don’t recall the genesis of how this came about.  I’m fairly certain there was some community pressure though. Board Votes Until last November, the Board only reported the vote totals and not how individual Board members voted.  That was one of the topics at a great lunch I had with Tim Mitchell and Kendal van Dyke at the Summit.  That was also the topic of the first question asked at the Board Q&A by Kendal.  Kendal expressed his opposition to to anonymous votes clearly and passionately and without trying to paint anyone into a corner.  Less than 24 hours later the PASS Board voted to make individual votes public unless the topic was under NDA.  That’s another area where the Board decided to change based on feedback from our members. Summit Location While this isn’t actually a governance issue it is one of the more public decisions we make that has taken some public criticism.  There is a significant portion of our members that want the Summit near them.  There is a significant portion of our members that like the Summit in Seattle.  There is a significant portion of our members that think it should move around the country.  I was one that felt strongly that there were significant, tangible benefits to our attendees to being in Seattle every year.  I’m also one that has been swayed by some very compelling arguments that we need to have at least one outside Seattle and then revisit the decision.  I can’t tell you how the Board will vote but I know the opinion of our members weighs heavily on the decision. Elections And that brings us to the grand-daddy of all governance issues.  My thesis for this blog post is that the PASS Board has implemented policy changes in response to member feedback.  It isn’t to defend or criticize our election process.  It’s just to say that is has been under going continuous change since I’ve been on the Board.  I ran for the Board in the fall of 2005.  I don’t know much about what happened before then.  I was actively volunteering for PASS for four years prior to that as a chapter leader and on the program committee.  I don’t recall any complaints about elections but that doesn’t mean they didn’t occur.  The questions from the Nominating Committee (NomCom) were trivial and the selection process rudimentary (For example, “Tell us about your accomplishments”).  I don’t even remember who I ran against or how many other people ran.  I ran for the VP of Marketing in the fall of 2007.  I don’t recall any significant changes the Board made in the election process for that election.  I think a lot of the changes in 2007 came from us asking the management company to work on the election process.  I was expecting a similar set of puff ball questions from my previous election.  Boy, was I in for a shock.  The NomCom had found a much better set of questions and really made the interview portion difficult.  The questions were much more behavioral in nature.  I’d already written about my vision for PASS and my goals.  They wanted to know how I handled adversity, how I handled criticism, how I handled conflict, how I handled troublesome volunteers, how I motivated people and how I responded to motivation. And many, many other things. They grilled me for over an hour.  I’ve done a fair bit of technical sales in my time.  I feel I speak well under pressure addressing pointed questions.  This interview intentionally put me under pressure.  In addition to wanting to know about my interpersonal skills, my work experience, my volunteer experience and my supervisory experience they wanted to see how I’d do under pressure.  They wanted to see who would respond under pressure and who wouldn’t.  It was a bit of a shock. That was the first big change I remember in the election process.  I know there were other improvements around the process but none of them stick in my mind quite like the unexpected hour-long grilling. The next big change I remember was after the 2009 elections.  Andy Warren was unhappy with the election process and wanted to make some changes.  He worked with Hannes at HQ and they came up with a better set of processes.  I think Andy moved PASS in the right direction.  Nonetheless, after the 2010 election even more people were very publicly clamoring for changes to our election process.  In August of 2010 we had a choice to make.  There were numerous bloggers criticizing the Board and our upcoming election.  The easy change would be to announce that we were changing the process in a way that would satisfy our critics.  I believe that a knee-jerk response to criticism is seldom correct. Instead the Board spent August and September and October and November listening to the community.  I visited two SQLSaturdays and asked questions of everyone I could.  I attended chapter meetings and asked questions of as many people as they’d let me.  At Summit I made it a point to introduce myself to strangers and ask them about the election.  At every breakfast I’d sit down at a table full of strangers and ask about the election.  I’m happy to say that I left most tables arguing about the election.  Most days I managed to get 2 or 3 breakfasts in. I spent less time talking to people that had already written about the election.  They were already expressing their opinion.  I wanted to talk to people that hadn’t spoken up.  I wanted to know what the silent majority thought.  The Board all attended the Q&A session where our members expressed their concerns about a variety of issues including the election. The PASS Board also chose to create the Election Review Committee.  We wanted people from the community that had been involved with PASS to look at our election process with fresh eyes while listening to what the community had to say and give us some advice on how we could improve the process.  I’m a part of this as is Andy Warren.  None of the other members are on the Board.  I’ve sat in numerous calls and interviews with this group and attended an open meeting at the Summit.  We asked anyone that wanted to discuss the election to come speak with us.  The ERC held an open meeting at the Summit and invited anyone to attend.  There are forums on the ERC web site where we’ve invited people to participate.  The ERC has reached to key people involved in recent elections.  The years that I haven’t mentioned also saw minor improvements in the election process.  Off the top of my head I don’t recall what exact changes were made each year.  Specifically since the 2010 election we’ve gone out of our way to seek input from the community about the process.  I’m not sure what more we could have done to invite feedback from the community. I think to say that we haven’t “fixed” the election process isn’t a fair criticism at this time.  We haven’t rushed any changes through the process.  If you don’t see any changes in our election process in July or August then I think it’s fair to criticize us for ignoring the community or ask for an explanation for what we’ve done. In Summary Andy’s main point was that the PASS Board hasn’t changed in response to our members wishes.  I think I’ve shown that time and time again the PASS Board has changed in response to what our members want.  There are only two outstanding issues: Summit location and elections.  The 2013 Summit location hasn’t been decided yet.  Our work on the elections is also in progress.  And at every step in the election review we’ve gone out of our way to listen to the community and incorporate their feedback on the process. I also hope I’m not encouraging everyone that wants some change in the organization to organize a “blog rush” against the Board.  We take public suggestions very seriously but we also take the time to evaluate those suggestions and learn what the rest of our members think and make a measured decision.

    Read the article

< Previous Page | 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147  | Next Page >