[Pulp-dev] docs-builder-2.10-build and docs-builder-2.11-build jenkins jobs

[Brian Bouterse]

I think we should only keep builders that we plan to use which would be for
the current bugfix Z-stream, the next feature release, and for pulp3. We're
not loosing anything because brining them back is trivial using Jenkins Job
Builder. The docs builders page is getting increasingly long so I think we
gain simplicity by only keeping things we plan to use. We would delete 2.10
and older builders.

Also, I propose the "docs maintainers" group should figure out how to
create/destroy these to reduce the burden on the release engineer. Right
now the docs builders are being maintained as part of the build process
which we probably should change even though I'm about to merge this PR[0].

I see now that the '*-build' name corresponds with the release config file
name. I think leaving them named as they are now is good, but we need some
documentation.

+1 to waiting to hear from smyers regarding the *-build which show red.

[0]: https://github.com/pulp/pulp/pull/2902

On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 12:45 PM, Tanya Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
wrote:

> I agree that it makes sense at least to stop running 2.10-* docs builders
> on a regular basis because we do not expect any new 2.10.z release.
> As for deletion I can see no harm here as well but then we should consider
> deleting builders for 2.8 and 2.9 as well.
>
> Is there any other possible builds which we may need for docs except
> nightly, beta, rc and release? I think '-build' or '-testing' works for me,
> since it is going to be manual irregular build for testing :)
>
> As discussed on IRC #pulp-dev, let's  talk to Sean about configs and
> version naming, so I am not making any PRs in that area till then.
> Thanks,
> Tanya
>
>
> On 12/19/2016 02:53 PM, Brian Bouterse wrote:
>
> Thanks for explanation. That all sounds correct. Here are some related
> thoughts regarding our docs builders. I'd like some feedback on these ideas.
>
> I think we should delete all docs builders for 2.10- including the -build,
> -release, and -dev builders. We don't use them anymore and the docs will
> continue to be served without disruption.
>
> Should we rename the builders ending in '-build' builders to be
> '-beta-or-rc'? Or maybe '-testing'?
>
> Also your PR is going to fix the two failing docs builders right? I can
> review that if that is helpful. I'm hoping to see all the docs builders go
> green.
>
> Thank you!
> Brian
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 19, 2016 at 5:32 AM, Tanya Tereshchenko <ttereshc at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I expected '.beta' or '.rc' to be present in the 'version' in config [0]
>> but according to the docs [1], this is not the case because 2.11 is
>> released.
>> I was not aware of that policy, so everything is correct :)
>>
>> But when there will be Beta or RC version, expect docs to be published at
>> http://docs.pulpproject.org/en/<pulp_version>/testing/
>> <http://docs.pulpproject.org/en/2.11/testing/>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulp_packaging/blob/master/ci/config
>> /releases/2.11-build.yaml#L10
>> [1] https://github.com/pulp/pulp_packaging/blob/master/ci/config
>> /releases/README.md#xy-buildyaml
>>
>> Tanya
>>
>>
>> On 12/19/2016 11:07 AM, Tanya Tereshchenko wrote:
>>
>> We have jobs for dev and release branches and this *-build ones are for
>> the rest which is basically Beta and RC builds and they are triggered
>> manually when needed. That's my understanding.
>>
>> I expect them to be published under 'testing/', so for 2.11-build they
>> should be here: http://docs.pulpproject.org/en/2.11/testing/
>> because of the way path is constructed [0] [1].
>>
>> I am looking at configs now and they do not seem to be correct to me.
>> I'll make a PR to see if others agree.
>>
>> [0] https://github.com/pulp/pulp_packaging/blob/master/ci/docs-b
>> uilder.py#L75-L78
>> [1] https://github.com/pulp/pulp_packaging/blob/master/ci/docs-b
>> uilder.py#L170
>>
>> Tanya
>>
>> On 12/17/2016 08:26 PM, Dennis Kliban wrote:
>>
>> These two Jenkins jobs are currently failing and I am not sure where they are supposed to publish docs to. Can someone explain what the purpose of these jobs is?  I'd like to fix them.
>>
>> -Dennis
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing listPulp-dev at redhat.comhttps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Pulp-dev mailing listPulp-dev at redhat.comhttps://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>>
>> _______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list
>> Pulp-dev at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/pulp-dev/attachments/20161220/28206ef2/attachment.htm>