You can use File Content Replacer build feature with predefined templates for .NET Core

https://www.jetbrains.com/help/teamcity/file-content-replacer.html#.NET+Core+csproj+templates

The problem can be solved by using mount options that force the application of the correct user and group eventhough these attributes can't really be set on the target system its sufficient to get around the docker related problem.

Also a reasonable set of privileges needs to be defined that is used for new files and folders.

mount -t cifs -o username=user,password=pass, \               # provide creds
  uid=www-data,forceuid,gid=root,forcegid, \                  # force gid and uid
  file_mode=744,dir_mode=744 //host/share /local/mountpoint   # set permissions for new files and directories

I'm not a member of Scrum Team. However, I'd like to get a sense of the health of a Scrum Team. What is the best way to understand a Scrum Team's performance?

To be more specific, things I would like to know:

• Is the team running at maximum efficiency?
• Is the team improving over the time?
• Is the team motivated enough?
• Is the team meeting their commitments?
• Is the team meeting coding standards?

Usually you want to test your code as closely as possible to how it's going to be deployed. This means you're going to want to run your tests against code that's been merged with master, so choose the first option (merge first, then test). There's no point in the 2nd option if you're never going to deploy the code in that state (i.e. unmerged).

Or for another perspective: good CI practices involve merging soon and merging often. This would naturally lead one to the first option.

There are no special events for that kind of activities.

Technical analysis or architecture design may be a part of backlog refinement or story implementation itself (or both).

However, despite the fact that the Scrum Guide does not describe any special events, there are no obstacles to hold a special meeting for these purposes. Scrum is a framework and it can be configured flexibly. Everything which is not forbidden is allowed

I am getting the output from my previous executions something like this:

[{u'Value': '2018-06-21', u'Key': 'Deletion_Date'}]

I want to get only 2018-06-21 saved in a variable.

I tried this

deletion_date = response1['TagList'][0]['Value']

But I am getting error

deletion_date = response1['TagList'][0]['Value']
IndexError: list index out of range

Could someone help me with this or some alternative solution

Sadly nobody answered, so I will provide feedback about how i did it so far.

Graphite was not a good solution for me due to its retention policy. Performance tests sent data to the database every millisecond, and due to retention Graphite did not store all the results but only the last one per the period, meaning if you sent 100 data points in the last minute, the first 99 would be dropped, the 100th one would be stored. This fact was found by me somewhere on some forum. I do not claim I have setup/configured/used graphite correctly, yet the result was several days of debugging a bug which appeared an actual feature, lots of stress and questioning if my head and hands grow out of my shoulders.

Next option was to use InfluxDB. Sadly didn't work for the following reason:
- If running InfluxDB in a Linux docker container, I was not able to bind mount it to a specific folder on host's OS outside of docker installation folder. A solution would be to try and use docker named volume. Maybe that would have worked, but I was short on time and patience.

The final solution was to use simply a Postgres DB. Created a timetable with all the metrics and a timestamp field. As a result, Locust writes the final session statistics into a CSV file. CSV file is parsed by a python script and parsed data is inserted into the table. Grafana then connects to the DB and quite nicely visualizes the results using a simple query.

Next possible question would be:

how to store the results of every single request to gain better precision for the results of my performance tests?

My personal suggestion would be to use influxDB with a consistent storage saved in a named volume if you are using Windows host. There the smallest time period can go down to milliseconds and data retrieval was very easily setup by manually writing a simple select query. Yet, please do not take my word for it and try this out, because i haven't done this, so my thoughts are nothing but a theory.

Happy performance testing.

I'm not intimately familiar with TFS, but in Scrum terminology, a requirement is one thing that may be a Product Backlog Item.

Consider the following from the Scrum Guide:

The Product Backlog lists all features, functions, requirements, enhancements, and fixes that constitute the changes to be made to the product in future releases. Product Backlog items have the attributes of a description, order, estimate and value.

If the Product Backlog contains only Product Backlog Items, then a requirement is one type of Product Backlog Item. A bug report would be another. A refactoring task could be another. Technical debt paydown would be yet another.

"Epics" and "Features" aren't a part of Scrum, as defined in the Scrum Guide. An Epic (and sometimes a Theme) are ways to group User Stories. The Scrum Guide doesn't require User Stories (it's mostly silent on how to format Product Backlog Items), but many teams have found success with them. If a Product Backlog Item is a User Story, it may be part of a larger Theme or Epic that describes a particular flow through the system. However, a Theme or Epic may not be something that is reasonably deliverable within an iteration.

In your case, requirements would be captured as Product Backlog Items. You may or may not want to group Product Backlog Items into Features or Epics - it depends specifically on the way you and your team decide to work.

I have a 10mb encrypted volume which I made with Veracrypt and was planning to upload it to the internet. I have a pretty strong password but was worried about its protection against brute force attacks. After searching this SE it seems like a Veracrypt encrypted volume can be easily brute forced ref1, ref2. If that's the case then given enough resources we can crack any encrypted volume with any length of password (>100) in mere days with parallel brute-forcing instead of years.

Do Veracrypt encrypted volumes have any kind of brute force protection built into it? Didn't Veracrypt creators know about this issue? Is there any other strong encrypting system which has brute force protection?

The question is, if a document that is collaboratively edited, one user per time, could be digitally signed by every editor before it is passed to the next editor. And if yes, could the final receiver use the public keys of every editor in reverse order to verify that the document was edited by the right editor and in the right order?

My guess is that, using some blockchain technique maybe the Hash pointer could help to achieve that, since the latest Hash pointer would include the hash of the hash blocks of every block, therefore every editor until this time. Is there any kind of software out there already that offers that feature?

In case you need an example to get the idea behind the question image this scenario. A teacher has given a task to a group of three students, all of them write to a notepad, the first one that finishes his part opens a .doc file pastes the content, signs the document and pass it to the second one who finishes, he does the same, and then the final student receives the doc, also pastes his content, signes it and then sends it to the teacher, who have the pubic keys of the students to verify the document editors.

As you understand this could also help each editor to be sure that he is not editing a tampered document.

Any thoughts on that would be much appreciated.