Am 18.06.19 um 10:28 schrieb sebb: > On Tue, 18 Jun 2019 at 07:42, Felix Schumacher > <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Am 17.06.19 um 21:57 schrieb sebb: >>> On Mon, 17 Jun 2019 at 17:44, Felix Schumacher >>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Am 16.06.19 um 21:02 schrieb Felix Schumacher: >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> I tried to adapt the buildbot config for JMeter to reflect the git >>>>> migration. >>>>> >>>>> The init-svnVersion step has been removed and most of the "got_revision" >>>>> properties are replaced by the buildnumber to keep a linear numbering >>>>> for the nightlies. The only place were I kept the got_revision property >>>>> is the java property for the "svn" version. >>>>> >>>>> So maybe we have nightlies again tomorrow >>>> Nightlies are building again (after I removed some svn specific stuff in >>>> the build.xml files and used the correct branch everywhere). >>>> >>>> But the nightlies are not getting indexed. There seems to be shell >>>> script involved named create-jmeter-nightlies-index.sh which might have >>>> to be updated. I don't know, since I don't even know where the sources >>>> for that script are. >>> https://svn.apache.org/repos/infra/infrastructure/buildbot/aegis/buildmaster/master1/public_html/projects/jmeter/nightlies >> Thanks. >> >> At the moment the script looks for directories named r{number} where >> number was the revision of the subversion repo. I changed the number to >> buildnumber (which is way smaller than the revision number). The >> directories are sorted by that number. That will cause the new builds to >> be at the end of the list. The list gets capped and the entries not >> shown -- at least not for the next 30 days or so. >> >> I wonder if it would be nicer to change the naming scheme from r{number} >> to b{number} to indicate that we now use buildnumbers instead of >> revisions. > That would be simplest.
But sadly not so simple as I thought. The build would have to be done with svn.revision set to buildnumber. I don't want to use the buildnumber there. Therefore I have chosen to use both the buildnumber and revision in the directory name. The revision can than be extracted from the directory name and used for the build artifacts. I checked in the needed changes for this scheme, but it seems that the committing the shell files is not enough to get them on the build servers. Do you know, what I have to do next? Felix > >> Or go wild and use git revisions and sort by file creation >> date instead of file name. >> >> What do you think? > But whatever works best; it's not critical to have these. > >> Felix >> >>>> Felix >>>> >>>>> Felix >>>>>
