Hi Alex,
sorry for the confusion ,... I meant the 1a ... the one if you build the utils
too.
And regarding the credentials: Something must have changes as I have never seen
that gui thingy pop up before and as soon as you login, it saves them in the
password manager thingy of windows.
It is true that I took those two out of the main maven reactor, but that's
actually a good practice. In plc4x we setup a dedicated git repo for releasing
these build tools. I have never seen any good coming from the old setup (I know
... I did it, but I learnt a lot).
Regarding the banches ... we did a git status after step 001a (the utils step)
and indeed it was done on develop. As the maven release isn't doing any
selecting and switching of branches it must have always been this way. If not
the utils release versions would only be updated in the release branch and not
develop. I couldn't find any cherry picking of commits in the process.
Well in the end the steps are way more complicated than I would be doing on my
local machine. Especially this tolling around checking out branches and tagging
and pushing is pretty complicated, in my opinion. Especially as most the stuff
is fully automated.
I think we managed to get the steps 1-4 (including the utils stuff) working
again, while keeping the cleanup I did a while ago.
I hope tomorrow it'll be simper to adjust the typedefs and the framework part.
One thing we did notice however that even after addressing the memory issues,
the build sometimes simply stuck and the build wouldn't continue.
In these cases simply killing the job (and the processes on the CI server)
didn't really help much ... we then had to reboot the machine in order to
continue. I think we rebooted the thing 5-6 times today.
Signing off for today,
Chris
Am 23.03.20, 21:38 schrieb "Alex Harui" <aha...@adobe.com.INVALID>:
Re: credentials: Does that mean that the git config is set to use the
credential manager? If so, maybe that should be turned off? When I did the
release, I had to type my password many times. Not sure what Piotr's
experience was.
Re: Branches: I don't remember what the steps are. I didn't think there
was a 1b, I don't see it in my emails, just a 1a that did both
compiler-jburg-types and compiler-build-tools. Assuming 1a and 1b now
reference these two projects, the thing to keep in mind is that they are
optional projects and so 1a (and probably 1b) won't be run for every release.
So, IMO, the branch should be made for the main projects in royale-compiler.
But if the changes you made effectively change the way the poms are run
(when there was a -utils profile for those two projects, the main pom still got
loaded and that may not be true now), then the set of steps may need to test
for existence of the branch or something like that, not sure.
In the end, the steps are just what you would run on your local computer to
fill the nexus staging repo, but broken into discrete steps at each point Maven
would normally push or sign. If you haven’t, it might be worth just running
Maven locally to fill a staging repo with and without the jburg-types and
build-tools projects to see how to control when Maven makes branches and
updates versions. Then come back and break that down into steps on the CI
server.
HTH,
-Alex
On 3/23/20, 12:30 PM, "Christofer Dutz" <christofer.d...@c-ware.de> wrote:
Another thing we just discovered.
The current setup seems to mess up the branches:
- 001 creates the branch and updates develop rel = 0.9.7-SNAPSHOT,
develop = 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT
- 001b updates DEVELOP and not the release branch
- 002 pushes develop to the release-branch hereby bumping the release
branch to the next version rel = 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT, develop = 0.9.8-SNAPSHOT
If the 001b changes would have been done in the release branch, develop
would still be using the old version.
So I would propose to change the order of 001 and 001b to "release" the
build tools before branching.
And I would propose to fix 002 to work on the right branch. As I could
see in maven central you have been releasing only even version number so I
assume this problem exists for quite some time now.
Chris
Am 23.03.20, 20:12 schrieb "Carlos Rovira" <carlosrov...@apache.org>:
Hi,
we just saw that windows stores a personal access token in Windows
Crendetials, so the RM is responsible to remove it when finish all
the
operations.
El lun., 23 mar. 2020 a las 19:44, Alex Harui
(<aha...@adobe.com.invalid>)
escribió:
>
>
> On 3/23/20, 11:32 AM, "Christofer Dutz"
<christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Alex,
>
> I did check and I didn't directly find any .git .ssh or
whatsoever
> directories ... do you have an Idea where that would be saved on
windows?
> The commits are authorized by Carlos and it's his RDP
connection,
> that's why I'm asking if there is any RDP magic going on. I
didn't see him
> entering anything anywhere and he said he didn't do it before.
>
> I don't know for sure, but here's a few links:
>
>
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fstackoverflow.com%2Fquestions%2F46878457%2Fadding-git-credentials-on-windows&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd54039f6a3064e27164808d7cf60ae32%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637205886459464311&sdata=I2oCfv5gcTIOSWmpe2U4f61%2ByxteRdt2sTaFCcvB51s%3D&reserved=0
>
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgit-scm.com%2Fbook%2Fen%2Fv2%2FGit-Tools-Credential-Storage&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd54039f6a3064e27164808d7cf60ae32%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637205886459474305&sdata=YBnZdIqu1CA6JGl%2BQvs9KzywrWLDRB37A2iLz7ms46M%3D&reserved=0
>
> I'm wondering if Carlos can remember if he did.anything like that
back
> when he wrote this:
>
>
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.apache.org%2Fthread.html%2F8ae38cea0c736418b432b2353f967161c4f8448261a3bdce390e8c46%2540%253Cdev.royale.apache.org%253E&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd54039f6a3064e27164808d7cf60ae32%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637205886459474305&sdata=vnPf1CNqsUgl00XwfgTo3svMBw%2FpCniL6VAJhucu7PA%3D&reserved=0
>
> As I replied back then, we shouldn't have GPG signing on the CI
Server,
> and hopefully no other credentials got added either.
>
> HTH,
> -Alex
>
> PS: I'm purposefully not looking myself so as not to accidentally
boot
> someone off the RDP connection.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Carlos Rovira
https://nam04.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2Fcarlosrovira&data=02%7C01%7Caharui%40adobe.com%7Cd54039f6a3064e27164808d7cf60ae32%7Cfa7b1b5a7b34438794aed2c178decee1%7C0%7C0%7C637205886459474305&sdata=zwg6%2Btn5C0lvXpRL8uKV5VLnj9ffqMaRKJlXK%2B3cj5o%3D&reserved=0
