I have an ASP.NET MVC3 project that uses Entity Framework 4.3 with the code-first approach. I use Migrations to keep the database up-to-date.
The project is under source-control and I have a number of branches. What I just realized is that there will be a problem when I want to merge one of my branches into the master. Since I have created migration-files in both branches, there will be overlapping migrations when I merge, which will probably cause conflicts.
Is there a good way to manage Migrations in a project with multiple branches?
Update
One way would be to merge, then delete all migration-files created while the branches were separate, and then create one new migration file that holds all changes from the time the branch was created until it was merged back in. This would work for the dev-environment where you can dump the database and re-build it with all the migration-files. The problem then would be the live-environment. Since you couldn't roll back to the time the branch was created without the risk of loosing data, there will be a conflict when you try to use your new migration-file to update the live database.
There is a much better solution for handling entity framework migration merge conflicts on a similar question.
All you need to do after a merge is to re-scaffold the meta data of the migration in the target branch. That is you do not rescaffold the up/down code, just the state in the resx-file.
add-migration [the_migration_to_rescaffold_metadata_for]
This almost always works. The procedure will fail if a different migration in the merge have changed the database in such a way that the migration is no longer runnable or gives an unexpected result. That being said - I believe that to be a very rare case as most migrations should be auto-generated, or at least not be dependent on other tables that are not changed in the migration itself as well.
One such case where rescaffold state would fail could be:
Column foo is an int and rows contain [0, 1, 2]
Migration A from branch A change foo to boolean (0 will become false automatically and > 0 will become true)
Migration B from branch B change foo to string. It expects it to be an int but it is a boolean, the migration will succeed though. Data will be lost since when migration B was created the rows would contain ["0", "1", "2"]. When migration A altered column to boolean (and did so successfully and with expected result) the rows will now contain ["0", "1", "1"] instead and Migration B will have a different end result than what was observed in Branch B.
There are probably more edge cases where things could go wrong with the solution. But if migrations up/down code is not dependent on things changed by another migration in the merge it should work well to just update the metadata in the migrations.