I see now, so the jar would contain all of the three shared libraries. We could create a worker pool like abstraction where the workers are the CI services, but that would require a scheduler to poll the finished jobs then submit the dependent ones. This sounds a bit inconvenient, where would that scheduler run: locally, on a CI or self hosted?
Another approach would be to use the worker the schedule the next task, in a similar fashion like dask's worker_client [1] launches tasks from tasks. There could be synchronization problems though. This approach requires to bootstrap crossbow on each CI jobs but that would: - make crossbow less CI dependent (to use azure pipelines as well) - unify the artifact uploading and downloading logic which is required in order to support dependent tasks - way less redundancy in task definitions What do You think? I'd prefer the second one. [1] https://github.com/dask/distributed/blob/master/docs/source/task-launch.rst On Sat, Oct 6, 2018 at 10:57 AM Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > It seems the complicated part of this will be having a dependent task > that packages up the 3 shared libraries, one for each platform, after > the individual packaging tasks are run. How would you propose handling > that? > On Fri, Oct 5, 2018 at 8:03 AM Krisztián Szűcs > <szucs.kriszt...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > Ohh, just read the thread, sorry! > > > > So crossbow is located here > https://github.com/apache/arrow/tree/master/dev/tasks > > I suggest to "fork" the python-wheels directory which contains three > templated ymls > > for osx, win and linux builds. For building on linux something like the > following should > > be sufficient > https://gist.github.com/kszucs/39154876d60c4109ff59b678afd65b19 > > Then You need another entry in the tasks.yml, for example: > > jar-gandiva-linux: > > platform: linux > > template: gandiva-jars/travis.linux.yml > > params: > > # arbitrary params which are available from the templated yml > > ... > > artifacts: > > # these are the expected artifacts from the build > > - gandiva-SNAPSHOT-{version}.jar > > ... > > > > Of course crossbow is wired towards the current packaging requirements, > so likely > > We need to adjust it to the newly appearing requirements. > > > > Feel free to reach me on gitter @kszucs. > > On Oct 4 2018, at 2:02 pm, Wes McKinney <wesmck...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > hi Praveen, > > > Probably the best way to accomplish this is to use our new Crossbow > > > infrastructure for task automation on Travis CI and Appveyor rather > > > than trying to do all of this within the CI entries. This is how we > > > are producing all of our binary artifacts for releases now -- > > > presumably in future ASF releases, we will want to include a > > > platform-independent Gandiva JAR in our release votes, so this all > > > needs to end up in Crossbow anyway. The intent is for the Crossbow > > > system to take on responsibility for all packaging automation rather > > > than using the normal CI for that. > > > > > > Krisztian, do you have time to help Praveen and the Gandiva crew with > > > this project? This will be an important test to document and improve > > > Crossbow for such use cases > > > > > > Thanks > > > Wes > > > On Thu, Oct 4, 2018 at 7:14 AM Praveen Kumar <prav...@dremio.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Folks, > > > > As part of https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ARROW-3385, we are > > > > planning to perform a snapshot release of the Gandiva Jar on each > commit to > > > > master. This would be a platform independent jar that contains the > core > > > > gandiva library and its jni bridge packaged for Mac, Windows and *nix > > > > platforms. > > > > > > > > The current plan is to deploy separate snapshot jars for each OS > through > > > > entries in the Gandiva CI matrix and then have a combine step that > pulls in > > > > each OS specific jar and builds a jar that has all the native > libraries. > > > > This build/deploy would happen only for commits on master branch and > not > > > > for PR requests > > > > > > > > Does the plan sound ok (or) please let us know if there is a better > way to > > > > achieve the same. > > > > > > > > If it sounds ok, can someone please help with the following > > > > 1. It looks like we only do travis builds and not appveyor for > master in > > > > arrow. Any reason for this? > > > > 2. Even if we did appveyor is there a way to sequence the builds. > Like wait > > > > for appveyor to complete before kicking off travis? Since we would > need the > > > > dll to be pre-built. > > > > 3. Someone would need to configure the credentials to use for the > ossrh > > > > deployment. The credentials would need access to deploy to > org.apache.arrow. > > > > > > > > Thanks ahead! >
