thanks for your interest and feedback Le samedi 7 octobre 2017, 12:00:32 CEST Tibor Digana a écrit : > 78 is too much. notice that there would also be a question on the git repos naming convention, to avoid flat 78 names but keep at least 3 meaningful groups (plugins, shared, resources: I think this is not absolutely necessary for doxia-tools)
> There is no problem to trigger release over sub-folders and tag it with > prefix which is already done in SVN. is it supported by maven-release plugin with git? notice I did not know that git was able to tag only a subtree: but I knew I don't yet understand every aspect of git magic... :) > The CI build can always trigger the root and Jenkinsfile would have 41 > stages for plugins, 26 stages for Shared, etc. > It can be done in Jenkinsfile and so the shell would not throw exception > but status would be set instead and goes to the next stage. > I do not know how to detect in GitSCM which sub-folder(s) received but I > guess this can be investigated. +1 but I don't know where to look for myself: on that point, I hope to have some help from Jenkinsfile experts and eventually start with svn, to have something before the git migration > Then it can be a kind of switch-case over committed folders in Jenkinsfile. > This means that every time another stage/sub-folder is shown in Pipeline > which will be messy in the UI. :( notice that we can perhaps split the repos in less parts than we have components: on plugins, for example, we already have 4 categories [1] which would avoid 1 repo with 41 plugins, but more something like 6+10+10+15 I suppose we could do the same for shared (reporting folder comes to my mind) The key feasibility issue is the capacity to release a sub-component from git with maven-release-plugin, IMHO (taking apart the git purists idea of 1 lifecycle = 1 git repo) Regards, Hervé [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/ > > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote: > > There are 6 svn locations without any special complexity that are waiting > > for > > a volunteer for git migration for a few years but nobody does anything > > about: > > I started 3 days ago to ask for help about it and got pretty no feedback > > [1] > > > > then there are the 4 complex svn locations (plugins, shared, resources, > > doxia- > > tools) that require much more work: I suppose we can't tell git migration > > is > > abandoned, but it will require someone to work on it seriously > > Remember that the key question [2] is: do we transform these 4 svn > > locations > > into 41 +26 + 6 + 5 = 78 independent git repos? > > Yes, I told that Jenkins configuration is one key aspect we need a > > strategy > > about, in parallel with git strategy. > > > > then there will be the remaining cases where we need to decide: lower > > impact, > > lower priority. > > > > > > Summary: nothing is abandoned, but: > > - simple cases: no volunteer to do the job > > - hard cases: is there a volunteer either to define a strategy or do some > > work > > on it? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > Hervé > > > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/ > > edf3642a7bdd515f0cad421c25589741819446463614bf0515e56dbe@ > > %3Cdev.maven.apache.org%3E > > > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Git > > +Migration#GitMigration-Migratinganaggregatortreeintoacollectionofgitrepos > > > > Le vendredi 6 octobre 2017, 20:35:45 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > > > But did we completely abandoned the idea of moving everything to git ? > > > The CI setup was the main stop for it ? > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> > > > > wrote: > > > > I was expecting the usual litany > > > > > > > > what I'm not confident currently with pipeline on Maven core is that > > > > we > > > > have > > > > for example the "maven-3.x-jenkinsfile/MNG-6242 - build #1 - null" > > > > message, > > > > with this "null" part that makes me wonder if we are using it as > > > > expected. > > > > > > And for large multi-module svn trunks (the ones we don't migrate to > > > > git: > > > > mainly plugins and shared), is there a solution to rebuild just > > > > changed > > > > modules? > > > > > > > > ideally, the rebuild when a SNAPSHOT dependency is published would > > > > have > > > > been a > > > > plus, but this is sufficiently a rare use that I won't be extremist > > > > > > > > > > > > Then IIUC, this migration job is one additional TODO for me... > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > Hervé > > > > > > > > Le vendredi 6 octobre 2017, 17:46:53 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit : > > > > > I agree that we should use pipeline nowdays > > > > > perhaps a shared lib if we want to standardize some stuffs and a set > > > > of > > > > > > > multi-branches jobs (or org folder but it requires GitHub :( ) > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Connolly < > > > > > > > > > > stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On Fri 6 Oct 2017 at 06:32, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > I just fixed a few failing jobs [1] to have again a usable > > > > Jenkins. > > > > > > > > > Now I'm facing some issues, I suppose caused by newer Jenkins > > > > > > > > versions: > > > > > > > - Maven 3.0.5 causes NoSuchMethodError: > > > > > > > o.c.plexus.util.xml.pull. > > > > > > > > > > > > MXParser > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > - I had to switch to JDK 8 for maven-plugin-tools job, since JDK > > > > > > > > causes > > > > > > > > > > > failures (looks like Jenkins uses a hack to inject JDK 7 as a > > > > tool > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > build JVM is Java 8) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should we drop Maven 3.0.5 builds and JDK 7? > > > > > > > Notice I didn't check which is the minimum Maven version > > > > required... > > > > > > > > > Or perhaps simply don't use the Jenkins Maven plugin with this > > > > Maven > > > > > > > > 3.0.5 > > > > > > > > > > > > > or > > > > > > > JDK 7 configuration: default build as Jenkins Maven plugin with > > > > JDK > > > > > > 8 + > > > > > > > > > > > latest > > > > > > > Maven, and other configurations as scripted jobs? > > > > > > > > > > > > http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2013/11/jenkins-maven-job-> > > > > > > > > > type-considered-evil.html > > > > > > > > > > <http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2013/11/jenkins-> > > > > > > > > > maven-job-type-considered-evil.html?m=1> > > > > > > > > > > We should stop using the evil job type as it’s minimum Java > > > > version is > > > > > > > > dictated by Jenkins’ Java minimum. > > > > > > > > > > > > > We need to define our common strategy and have a consistent > > > > > > > configuration > > > > > > > for > > > > > > > every job understood by everybody > > > > > > > > > > > > I recommend Jenkinsfile and the `withMaven` wrapper > > > > > > > > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Hervé > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [1] https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > [2] > > > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/maven-> > > > > > > > > > > > > > plugin-tools-jdk-1.7/162/console > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------ > > > > > > > > --------- > > > > > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > > > > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@maven.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@maven.apache.org
