Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use placeholder to define the integration build repository #2574

Draft
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

laeubi
Copy link
Contributor

@laeubi laeubi commented Nov 24, 2024

Currently we use fixed strings that regularly needs to be updated, but
the contents could actually be computed automatically.

This replace fixed strings with using properties making it needless to
change them all the time. (this also includes the changes from #2573)

This would need just one little adjustment in the process, the next stream I-Build repository must point to the previous stream until the first I-Build happens.

So what do you think? @merks can you tell how much effort it would be regarding the inclusion of the previous stream? I'm not sure how the exact process is with the ibuild repos.

Copy link
Contributor

@merks merks left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Seems fine. But I don't have in-depth knowledge about the details.

@merks
Copy link
Contributor

merks commented Nov 24, 2024

So what do you think? @merks can you tell how much effort it would be regarding the inclusion of the previous stream? I'm not sure how the exact process is with the ibuild repos.

Sorry, I don't really understand the question?

Copy link
Member

@akurtakov akurtakov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Overall looks good, just the question about releaseVersion containing micro version .

@@ -77,9 +78,9 @@
'eclipiserun-repo' repository, such as for computing .api-descriptions and
generating API Tools reports.
-->
<eclipserun-repo>https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.34-I-builds/</eclipserun-repo>
<eclipserun-repo>https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/${releaseVersion}-${buildType}-builds/</eclipserun-repo>
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should releaseVersion be 4.35 (not 4.35.0) for this to work? There shouldn't be https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35.0-I-builds/

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes, good point.

@laeubi
Copy link
Contributor Author

laeubi commented Nov 24, 2024

Sorry, I don't really understand the question?

Currently we have https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.34-I-builds and the ibuilds seem to push their content there but:

  1. at some point (maybe at GA?!?) the content vanishes
  2. there is some magic to mark a build unstable
  3. ... maybe more ...
  4. At some point in time, there will be https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35-I-builds populated and we change that

So what would be required is that unless "point 4" has happened there already is https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35-I-builds but simply points to https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.34-I-builds

So we can use the "new" URL already even though it has not yet the content (and just is an alias).

Should releaseVersion be 4.35 (not 4.35.0) for this to work?

Yes that's because I'm using an outdated version here, I'll rebase this on master.

Actually the both properties 'releaseNumberSDK' and
'releaseNumberPlatform' are always the same and even if the comment
mentions they might be different at some time it is better to unify them
until then.

Because of this there is now a new 'releaseVersion' defined as a single
property.
Use placeholder to define the integration build repository

Currently we use fixed strings that regularly needs to be updated, but
the contents could actually be computed automatically.

This replace fixed strings with using properties making it needless to
change them all the time.
@merks
Copy link
Contributor

merks commented Nov 24, 2024

I see. The empty state of https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35-I-builds is indeed rather inconvenient. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of how these composites are maintain/managed. 😞

Copy link
Member

@HannesWell HannesWell left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To me this looks good as well, during the release process it should just be made sure that upon creation of the new I-build repo should get the linked to the latest RC as mentioned already.
At least the repository already exists a.t.m. but is empty:
https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35-I-builds/

Their creation is tracked in #2564

I see. The empty state of https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/4.35-I-builds is indeed rather inconvenient. Unfortunately I have no knowledge of how these composites are maintain/managed. 😞

#2564 mentions the Jenkins job https://ci.eclipse.org/releng/job/Releng/job/newStreamRepos/.

I think in general all eclipse (-SDK) repos are managed through the Jenkins jobs in https://ci.eclipse.org/releng/job/Releng/, which are defined in
https://github.com/eclipse-platform/eclipse.platform.releng.aggregator/tree/5bddc6c2de3374aed50318b550b71222f2963f15/JenkinsJobs/Releng

From the definition of the newStreamRepos job I think after the https://download.eclipse.org/eclipse/updates/template_repo/ has been copied we should 'simply' do the same as the I-build does when it adds a new I-build sub-repo, just linking the latest RC. Or the new stream repos should already be created before RC2 and adding an RC should be part of the RC2+x process in order to always use the latest RC.

@HannesWell
Copy link
Member

The commit message does not match the content anymore.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants