Continuous integration

This article includes a list of general references, but it lacks sufficient corresponding inline citations. Please help to improve this article by introducing more precise citations. (July 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

Part of a series on
Software development
Core activities Data modeling Processes Requirements Design Construction Engineering Testing Debugging Deployment Maintenance
Paradigms and models Agile Cleanroom Incremental Prototyping Spiral V model Waterfall
Methodologies and frameworks ASD DevOps DAD DSDM FDD IID Kanban Lean SD LeSS MDD MSF PSP RAD RUP SAFe Scrum SEMAT TDD TSP OpenUP UP XP
Supporting disciplines Configuration management Documentation Software quality assurance Project management User experience
Practices ATDD BDD CCO CI CD DDD PP SBE Stand-up TDD
Tools Compiler Debugger Profiler GUI designer UML Modeling IDE Build automation Release automation Infrastructure as code
Standards and bodies of knowledge CMMI IEEE standards ISO 9001 ISO/IEC standards PMBOK SWEBOK ITIL IREB OMG
Glossaries Artificial intelligence Computer science Electrical and electronics engineering
Outlines Outline of software development
v t e

Continuous integration (CI) is the practice of integrating source code changes frequently and ensuring that the integrated codebase is in a workable state.

Typically, developers

Often, the automated process runs on each commit or runs on a schedule such as once a day.

Grady Booch first proposed the term CI in 1991,^[2] although he did not advocate integrating multiple times a day, but later, CI came to include that aspect.^[3]

History

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (August 2014)

The earliest known work on continuous integration was the Infuse environment developed by G. E. Kaiser, D. E. Perry, and W. M. Schell.^[4]

In 1994, Grady Booch used the phrase continuous integration in Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with Applications (2nd edition)^[5] to explain how, when developing using micro processes, "internal releases represent a sort of continuous integration of the system, and exist to force closure of the micro process".

In 1997, Kent Beck and Ron Jeffries invented extreme programming (XP) while on the Chrysler Comprehensive Compensation System project, including continuous integration.^{[1][self-published source]} Beck published about continuous integration in 1998, emphasising the importance of face-to-face communication over technological support.^[6] In 1999, Beck elaborated more in his first full book on Extreme Programming.^[7] CruiseControl, one of the first open-source CI tools,^{[8][self-published source]} was released in 2001.

In 2010, Timothy Fitz published an article detailing how IMVU's engineering team had built and been using the first practical CI system. While his post was originally met with skepticism, it quickly caught on and found widespread adoption^[9] as part of the lean software development methodology, also based on IMVU.

Practices

The core activities of CI are developers co-locate code changes in a shared, integration area frequently and that the resulting integrated codebase is verified for correctness. The first part generally involves merging changes to a common version control branch. The second part generally involves automated processes including: building, testing and many other processes.

Typically, a server builds from the integration area frequently; i.e. after each commit or periodically like once a day. The server may perform quality control checks such as running unit tests^[10] and collect software quality metrics via processes such as static analysis and performance testing.

Related practices

This section contains instructions, advice, or how-to content. Please help rewrite the content so that it is more encyclopedic or move it to Wikiversity, Wikibooks, or Wikivoyage. (May 2015)

This section lists best practices from practitioners for other practices that enhance CI.

Build automation

Build automation is a best practice.^[11][12]

Atomic commits

CI requires the version control system to support atomic commits; i.e., all of a developer's changes are handled as a single commit.

Committing changes

When making a code change, a

, this copy diverges from the latest version.

The longer development continues on a branch without merging to the integration branch, the greater the risk of multiple integration conflicts^[13] and failures when the developer branch is eventually merged back. When developers submit code to the repository they must first update their code to reflect the changes in the repository since they took their copy. The more changes the repository contains, the more work developers must do before submitting their own changes.

Eventually, the repository may become so different from the developers' baselines that they enter what is sometimes referred to as "merge hell", or "integration hell",^[14] where the time it takes to integrate exceeds the time it took to make their original changes.^[15]

Testing locally

Proponents of CI suggest that developers should use test-driven development and to ensure that all unit tests pass locally before committing to the integration branch so that one developer's work does not break another developer's copy.

Incomplete features can be disabled before committing, using feature toggles.

Continuous delivery and continuous deployment

Continuous delivery ensures the software checked in on an integration branch is always in a state that can be deployed to users, and continuous deployment automates the deployment process.

Continuous delivery and continuous deployment are often performed in conjunction with CI and together form a CI/CD pipeline.

Version control

Proponents of CI recommend storing all files and information needed for building in version control, (for git a repository); that the system should be buildable from a fresh checkout and not require additional dependencies.

Martin Fowler recommends that all developers commit to the same integration branch.^[16]

Automate the build

Build automation tools automate building.

Proponents of CI recommend that a single command should have the capability of building the system.

Automation often includes automating the integration, which often includes

files).

Commit frequently

Developers can reduce the effort of resolving conflicting changes by synchronizing changes with each other frequently; at least daily. Checking in a week's worth of work risks conflict both in likelihood of occurrence and complexity to resolve. Relatively small conflicts are significantly easier to resolve than larger ones. Integrating (committing) changes at least once a day is considered good practice, and more often better.^[17]

Daily build

Building daily, if not more often, is generally recommended.^{[citation needed]}

Every commit should be built

The system should build commits to the current working version to verify that they integrate correctly. A common practice is to use Automated Continuous Integration, although this may be done manually. Automated Continuous Integration employs a continuous integration server or

for changes, then automatically run the build process.

Every bug-fix commit should come with a test case

When fixing a bug, it is a good practice to push a test case that reproduces the bug. This avoids the fix to be reverted, and the bug to reappear, which is known as a regression.

Keep the build fast

The build needs to complete rapidly so that if there is a problem with integration, it is quickly identified.

Test in a clone of the production environment

Having a

, etc.) that are beyond the team's control, still evolving, or too complex to configure in a virtual test lab.

Make it easy to get the latest deliverables

Making builds readily available to stakeholders and testers can reduce the amount of rework necessary when rebuilding a feature that doesn't meet requirements. Additionally, early testing reduces the chances that defects survive until deployment. Finding errors earlier can reduce the amount of work necessary to resolve them.

All programmers should start the day by updating the project from the repository. That way, they will all stay up to date.

Everyone can see the results of the latest build

It should be easy to find out whether the build breaks and, if so, who made the relevant change and what that change was.

Automate deployment

Most CI systems allow the running of scripts after a build finishes. In most situations, it is possible to write a script to deploy the application to a live test server that everyone can look at. A further advance in this way of thinking is continuous deployment, which calls for the software to be deployed directly into production, often with additional automation to prevent defects or regressions.^[18][19]

Benefits

The neutrality of this section is disputed. Relevant discussion may be found on the talk page. Please do not remove this message until conditions to do so are met. (May 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

This section needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources in this section. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (May 2016) (Learn how and when to remove this message)

CI benefits include:

• Facilitates detecting bugs earlier
• Reduces effort to find cause of bugs; if a CI test fails then changes since last good build contain causing change; if build after each change then exactly one change is the cause^[1]
• Avoids the chaos of integrating many changes
• When a test fails or a bug is found, reverting the codebase to a good state results in fewer lost changes
• Frequent availability of a known-good build for testing, demo, and release
• Frequent code commit encourages modular, less complex code^[20]
• Quick feedback on system-wide impact of code changes
• Supports collection of
  code complexity

Risks

Risks of CI include:

• Build system setup requires effort^[21]
• Writing and maintaining an automated test suite requires effort
• Value added depends on the quality of tests[22]
• High build latency (sitting in queue) limits value^[22]
• Implies that incomplete code should not be integrated which is counter to some developer's preferred practice^[22]
• Safety and mission-critical development assurance (e.g., DO-178C, ISO 26262) require documentation and review which may be difficult to achieve

See also

• Application release automation
   – Process of packaging and deploymentPages displaying short descriptions of redirect targets
• Build light indicator – visual device used in agile software development to inform the team on the build progressPages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
• Comparison of continuous integration software
• Continuous design – modular design process in which components can be freely substituted to improve the design, modify performance or change another feature at a later timePages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
• Continuous testing – process of executing automated tests as part of the software delivery pipeline to obtain immediate feedback on the business risks associated with a release candidatePages displaying wikidata descriptions as a fallback
• Multi-stage continuous integration – Software development technique
• Rapid application development – Concept of software development

References

External links

• "Continuous Integration" (wiki) (a collegial discussion). C2. {{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
• Richardson, Jared. "Continuous Integration: The Cornerstone of a Great Shop" (introduction).
• Flowers, Jay. "A Recipe for Build Maintainability and Reusability". Archived from the original on 25 June 2020. Retrieved 28 May 2006.
• Duvall, Paul (4 December 2007). "Developer works". IBM.
• "Version lifecycle". MediaWiki. June 2024.