PowerShell Core Release Improvements

Travis Plunk


For PowerShell Core, we basically had to build a new engineering system to build and release it. How we build it has evolved over time as we learn and our other teams have implemented features that make some tasks easier. We are finally at a state that we believe we can engineer a system that builds PowerShell Core for release with as little human interaction as necessary.

Current state

Before the changes described here, we had one build per platform. After the binaries were built, they had to be tested and then packaged into the various packages for release. This is done in a private Azure DevOps Pipelines instance. In this state, it took a good deal of people’s time to do a PowerShell Core release. Before these changes, it would take 3-4 people about a week to release PowerShell Core. During this time, the percentage of time people were focused on the release probably averaged 50%.


  1. Remain compliant with Microsoft and external standards we are required to follow.
  2. Automate as much of the build, test, and release process as possible.
    • This should significantly reduce the amount of human toil needed in each release.
  3. Hopefully, provide some tools or practices others can follow.

What we have done so far

  1. We ported our CI tests to Azure DevOps Pipelines.
    • We have used this in a release and we see that this allowed us to run at least those test in our private Azure DevOps Pipelines instance.
    • This saves us 2-4 man hours per release and a day or more of calendar time if all goes well.
  2. We have moved our release build definitions to YAML.
    • We have used this in a release and we see that this allows us to treat the release build as code and iterate more quickly.
    • This saves us 1-2 man hours per release, when we have done everything correctly.
  3. I have begun to merge the the different platform builds into one combined build.
    • We have not yet used this in a release but we believe this should allow us to have a single button that gets us ready to test.
    • This has not been in use long enough to determine how much time it will save.
  4. We have begun to automate our releases testing. Our release testing is very similar to our CI testing just across more distributions and versions of Windows. We plan to be able to run this through Azure DevOps Pipelines as well.
    • This has not been in use long enough to determine how much time it will save.
  5. We have automated the generation of the draft of the change log and categorizing the entries based on labels the maintainers apply to the PRs. After generation, the maintainers still need to review the change descriptions to make sure it makes sense in the change log.
    • This saves us 2-4 man hours per release.

Summary of improvements

After all these changes, we can now release with 2-3 people in 2 to 3 days, with an average of 25% time focusing on the release.

Details of the combined build

Azure DevOps Pipelines allows us to define complex build pipeline. The build will be complex but things like templates in Azure DevOps makes breaking it into a manageable pieces.

Although this design does not technically reduce the number of parts, one significant thing it does for us it put all of our artifacts, in one place. Having the artifacts in one place, reduces the input to the steps in the rest of the build such as test and release.

I’m not going to discuss it much, but in order to coordinate this work we are keeping diagram of the build. I’ll include it here. If you want me to post another blog on the details, please leave a comment.


What is left to do

  1. We still have to add the other various NuGet package build steps to the coordinated build.
  2. We need to automate functionality (CI tests) across a representative sample of supported platforms.
  3. It would be nice if we could enforce in GitHub the process that helps us automate the change log generation.
  4. We need to automate the release process including:
    • Automating package testing. For example, MSI, Zip, Deb, RPM, and Snap.
    • Automating the actual release to GitHub, mcr.microsoft.com, packages.microsoft.com and the Snap store.

Travis Plunk Senior Software Engineer PowerShell Team


Discussion is closed. Login to edit/delete existing comments.

  • Mystery Man 0

    On my end, we have the usual admin hurdles. We have to be able to:
    1. Deploy PowerShell to remote machines
    2. Keep them updated
    3. Keep their help/documentation updated
    This is harder than you’d think.

  • Máté Ferenc Nagy-Egri 0

    Very nice blog post. I already gave Azure Pipelines a spin on our own hosted machines for CI builds and it works great. (Testing OpenCL/SYCL project builds on various GPU vendors and various driver versions. Our cluster is very heterogenous, something I cannot reproduce in the cloud or my devbox alone. I’m still waiting on DSC Core to automate cluster management so I don’t have to learn Puppet.)
    As for Powershell, do you see value in having an auto updated MSIX release (perhaps distributed via the Store) akin to the Snap release? (Kudos for Snap BTW!)

  • Daniel Scott-Raynsford 0

    Great post. Very keen to know more about the detail around build tasks that are used and how you build and execute tests on the various platforms you need to validate on. Thank you!

    • Travis Plunk [MSFT] 0

      The build portion of our release is in the repo in the link below.  Some tasks are proprietary, but the names should be self explanitory.
      The actualy release, where the validation happens, currently cannot be written in YAML, so we cannot check that in, but the tasks are a subset of what we use in the build and CI (of course we have different scripts we run in the tasks.)Please let me know if you want to know more.  Feel free to message me on twitter and we can get a private thread going on what you want to know.https://github.com/PowerShell/PowerShell/blob/master/tools/releaseBuild/azureDevOps/releaseBuild.yml

  • Brett Jacobson 0

    Please add packaging for Chocolatey to your automated build process.  Installing via Chocolatey is by far the simplest option on Windows, and should be treated like the Linux packaging!

Feedback usabilla icon