[Pulp-dev] Proposal to replace pulp 2.15's nightly jobs
rchan at redhat.com
Fri Nov 10 20:25:27 UTC 2017
Thanks, for the education, Patrick. So sounds great to move over to
the pulp-packaging* jobs in jenkins for nightlies going forward and turning
off the build-automation jobs." And have no particular understanding on
timing - so whatever works for you and helps with looking back on
historical reporting without much confusion sounds good to me.
I'm assuming that with the Pulp 2 - Master UI tab, that there will be lots
of job here. Will those jobs continue to have a 2.15 in the name and then
we easily see where the next .y build was done? In otherwords, it is just
the reporting tab and not the naming of the job that will change.
And once a new build (.y.0 or .z) is created, then a new ui tab will be
I did tell Patrick I would have more questions....
On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 12:07 PM, Preethi Thomas <pthomas at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Fri, Nov 10, 2017 at 11:59 AM, Patrick Creech <pcreech at redhat.com>
>> On Fri, 2017-11-10 at 11:35 -0500, Jeremy Audet wrote:
>> > > > Hosting packages in just one place is simpler than hosting packages
>> in multiple places.
>> > > > There's
>> > > > less room for error when the simpler thing is done.
>> > > >
>> > >
>> > > It shouldn't be too hard to set up.
>> > Fair enough. I also think that hosting packages on one location helps
>> to prevent end-user
>> > confusion. But we can host packages wherever is appropriate, and I
>> don't have a terribly strong
>> > opinion here.
>> I'm already working on having the repo on koji generated in such a way
>> that it rsyncs nicely over to
>> the destination at fedorapeople with little effort.
>> > > I would probably want to keep it in a 'nightly' or 'master'
>> > > folder instead of a versioned folder, to help aign the intent of
>> explicitly distinguishing this
>> > > workflow from others. Thoughts?
>> > Yes, please. If there's a directory called "2.15," then I think that
>> there's a 2.15 release. If
>> > there's a directory called "nightly" or "master," then I think that
>> there are nightly builds, or
>> > builds from master.
>> > To nitpick: I like the idea "master" a little bit more. What if we
>> improved our development and
>> > build processes so that there were two builds in a day? "master"
>> reflects the idea that the builds
>> > come from the master branch, whereas "nightly" reflects the idea that
>> there's one build per day.
>> I too like 'master' over 'nightly'. +1 to using this term instead for
>> what we consider the
>> 'nightly' process. (as we do, on frequent occasion, rebuild these
>> packages before the next 'night'
>> is to be ran to help with many things)
> I have changed this on the Jenkins UI.
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev