Brilliant, thanks a lot!
On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 3:28 PM, Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> wrote: > On Wed, 2016-11-09 at 21:37 +0100, Julian Sedding wrote: >> Hi Robert >> >> Yes absolutely, that sounds great! >> >> Thanks for your prompt replies. > > > Done, see https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/SLING-6290 . > > I've added the 'rebuildDaily' property for the oak-server module, feel > free to add it to any other jobs that need it. > > Robert > >> >> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 9:16 PM, Robert Munteanu <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > On Wed, 2016-11-09 at 20:49 +0100, Julian Sedding wrote: >> > > Hi Robert >> > > >> > > Thanks for the hints. >> > > >> > > I was wondering if it is possible to trigger a build of each >> > > module >> > > at >> > > least once every 24h? Even if there are no changes in the module. >> > > >> > > Writing a Jenkins trigger, extracting dependencies from PaxExam >> > > tests >> > > does not sound trivial. And that may be only one case of many. >> > >> > Pax-Exam is one, provisioning model is another. >> > >> > I would propose the following: >> > >> > 1. for jobs that we know have 'hidden' depedendencies to SNAPSHOT >> > versions, either through pax-exam or the provisioning model, we add >> > a >> > new property in tooling/jenkins/create_jobs.groovy [1], something >> > like >> > 'rebuildNightly' >> > >> > 2. for those jobs we enable a time-based trigger with the value 'H >> > H * >> > * *' , which according to Jenkins docs is a value that is random >> > across >> > jobs, but remains fixed for a certain job. >> > >> > So for instance sling-bundles-api-1.7 would run at 11:41:48 AM UTC, >> > while sling-bundles-api-1.8 woudl run at 1:10:48 PM UTC >> > >> > Would that work for you? >> > >> > Robert >> > >> > [1]: https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/sling/trunk/tooling/jenkins/c >> > reat >> > e_jobs.groovy >> > >> > > >> > > Regards >> > > Julian >> > > >> > > >> > > On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Robert Munteanu <[email protected] >> > > rg> >> > > wrote: >> > > > Hi Julian, >> > > > >> > > > On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 22:29 +0100, Julian Sedding wrote: >> > > > > Hi Robert >> > > > > >> > > > > I think the test failures in oak-server did not come up >> > > > > because >> > > > > of >> > > > > the >> > > > > modularised jenkins jobs we have now. >> > > > > >> > > > > The bundle's build seems to have run last after changes were >> > > > > applied >> > > > > to it. However, a referenced SNAPSHOT dependency has evolved >> > > > > since >> > > > > and >> > > > > made the tests fail. >> > > > > >> > > > > Any ideas how to catch this earlier? >> > > > >> > > > I've added some hints about this at [1] and [2]. >> > > > >> > > > Basically the issue is that Jenkins does not know about inter- >> > > > job >> > > > dependencies based on Pax-Exam code. The way to automate it >> > > > would >> > > > be to >> > > > write a new Jenkins Trigger and deploy it on builds.apache.org >> > > > . >> > > > >> > > > Robert >> > > > >> > > > [1]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SLING/Sling+Je >> > > > nkin >> > > > s+Se >> > > > tup#SlingJenkinsSetup-Managinginter-jobdependencies >> > > > [2]: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/SLING/Sling+Je >> > > > nkin >> > > > s+Se >> > > > tup#SlingJenkinsSetup-Pax-ExamtestswithSNAPSHOTdependencies >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > > >> > > > > Regards >> > > > > Julian >> > > > > >> > > > > PS: I have filed SLING-6260 for the failing oak-server ITs >> > > > > and >> > > > > committed a fix. >> > > > > >> > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 10:07 PM, Robert Munteanu <rombert@apa >> > > > > che. >> > > > > org> >> > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > Hi Alex. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > On Tue, 2016-11-08 at 20:01 +0000, Alexander Klimetschek >> > > > > > wrote: >> > > > > > > I have some trouble building Sling (all of it, it's been >> > > > > > > a >> > > > > > > while >> > > > > > > since I tried that :) >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 1. It seems the Sling build requires Java 1.8 ("Apache >> > > > > > > Sling >> > > > > > > Testing >> > > > > > > PaxExam" project failed with not all bundles loaded when >> > > > > > > I >> > > > > > > ran it >> > > > > > > with a 1.7 JDK). A check/hint at the start of the build >> > > > > > > would >> > > > > > > be >> > > > > > > great. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Yes, some projects, mostly related to testing, pull in a >> > > > > > launchpad >> > > > > > version which requires Java 8. I'm not sure that the best >> > > > > > fix >> > > > > > is >> > > > > > here. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > We could move all of them to a Java 8 profile, which might >> > > > > > not >> > > > > > be >> > > > > > OK >> > > > > > because you're missing projects without noticing. Or we >> > > > > > could >> > > > > > fail >> > > > > > the >> > > > > > reactor build altogether, which again is tricky since you >> > > > > > might >> > > > > > want to >> > > > > > build a subset of the reactor using mvn -pl ... . >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 2. Then I get one project further to "Apache Sling JCR >> > > > > > > Oak >> > > > > > > Repository >> > > > > > > Server" which fails as well during the test with not all >> > > > > > > bundles >> > > > > > > loaded issues: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > Tests in error: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > LoginAdminBlacklistedIT.org.apache.sling.jcr.oak.server.i >> > > > > > > t.Lo >> > > > > > > ginA >> > > > > > > dmin >> > > > > > > BlacklistedIT » TestContainer >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > LoginAdminWhitelistedIT.org.apache.sling.jcr.oak.server.i >> > > > > > > t.Lo >> > > > > > > ginA >> > > > > > > dmin >> > > > > > > WhitelistedIT » TestContainer >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > OakServerIT.org.apache.sling.jcr.oak.server.it.OakServerI >> > > > > > > T >> > > > > > > » >> > > > > > > TestContainer The… >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > I see this in the log: >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > org.osgi.framework.BundleException: Unable to resolve >> > > > > > > org.apache.sling.jcr.repoinit [79](R 79.0): missing >> > > > > > > requirement >> > > > > > > [org.apache.sling.jcr.repoinit [79](R 79.0)] >> > > > > > > osgi.wiring.package; >> > > > > > > (&(osgi.wiring.package=org.apache.sling.repoinit.parser.o >> > > > > > > pera >> > > > > > > tion >> > > > > > > s)(v >> > > > > > > ersion>=3.0.0)(!(version>=4.0.0))) Unresolved >> > > > > > > requirements: >> > > > > > > [[org.apache.sling.jcr.repoinit [79](R 79.0)] >> > > > > > > osgi.wiring.package; >> > > > > > > (&(osgi.wiring.package=org.apache.sling.repoinit.parser.o >> > > > > > > pera >> > > > > > > tion >> > > > > > > s)(v >> > > > > > > ersion>=3.0.0)(!(version>=4.0.0)))] >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.resolveBundleRevision(Fe >> > > > > > > lix. >> > > > > > > java >> > > > > > > :411 >> > > > > > > 1) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.startBundle(Felix.java:2 >> > > > > > > 117) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > org.apache.felix.framework.Felix.setActiveStartLevel(Feli >> > > > > > > x.ja >> > > > > > > va:1 >> > > > > > > 371) >> > > > > > > at >> > > > > > > org.apache.felix.framework.FrameworkStartLevelImpl.run(Fr >> > > > > > > amew >> > > > > > > orkS >> > > > > > > tart >> > > > > > > LevelImpl.java:308) >> > > > > > > at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > ( I guess Julian already fixed it ) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > >> > > > > > > 3. Still A LOT of projects to go in the build, so I am >> > > > > > > now >> > > > > > > going >> > > > > > > to >> > > > > > > skip the tests :( >> > > > > > >> > > > > > We still have some flaky tests, see the dedicated Jenkins >> > > > > > view >> > > > > > at >> > > > > > >> > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/S-Z/view/Sling-Dashboard/ >> > > > > > >> > > > > > So you might still experience failures. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > FWIW, all SNAPSHOTs are deployed to repository.apache.org, >> > > > > > so >> > > > > > you >> > > > > > should not need to build all of Sling - it's fine to build >> > > > > > individual >> > > > > > projects. >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Unless your goal is to build all of Sling, which is of >> > > > > > course >> > > > > > fine >> > > > > > :-) >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Thanks, >> > > > > > >> > > > > > Robert >
