Re: [Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

2019-01-14 Thread Andrea Aime
On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:23 PM Andrea Aime 
wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:07 PM  wrote:
>
>> Thanks for raising the ticket, but I think the missing deps were expected
>> (noted in the teamengine-docker README).
>>
>
> Yep, I've seen it, the intent of that ticket is to make them show us the
> goods, or argue to stand up a repo (I cannot do it right now,
> but I'm participating a bit more in OGC lately, so have occasions to
> reiterate) :-p
>

Something is moving:
https://github.com/opengeospatial/teamengine-docker/issues/26#issuecomment-453945703

:-D

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead
GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39
0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549
http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
--- *Con riferimento
alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 -
Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni
circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali
allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i
destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per
errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le
sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended
only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679
“GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information
herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail.*
___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel


Re: [Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

2019-01-13 Thread Andrea Aime
On Sun, Jan 13, 2019 at 9:07 PM  wrote:

> Thanks for raising the ticket, but I think the missing deps were expected
> (noted in the teamengine-docker README).
>

Yep, I've seen it, the intent of that ticket is to make them show us the
goods, or argue to stand up a repo (I cannot do it right now,
but I'm participating a bit more in OGC lately, so have occasions to
reiterate) :-p


>  I also hit the lack of deps so wanted to simplify the docker image build
> if possible, but also some prioritisation / narrowing of the tests might
> help us to focus the effort. If you had to pick a top 3 or 5, what tests
> are most important?
>

Depends on the objective. If you just want to give the machinery a try, I'd
go for WMS 1.3, WFS 2.0 and WCS 2.0.
Eventually we'll need a VM with all the protocols and formats we implement,
starting with the protocols we already test for daily on the build server.

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead
GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39
0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549
http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
--- *Con riferimento
alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 -
Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni
circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali
allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i
destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per
errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le
sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended
only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679
“GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information
herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail.*
___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel


Re: [Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

2019-01-13 Thread bradh
Thanks for raising the ticket, but I think the missing deps were expected 
(noted in the teamengine-docker README).

 

I also hit the lack of deps so wanted to simplify the docker image build if 
possible, but also some prioritisation / narrowing of the tests might help us 
to focus the effort. If you had to pick a top 3 or 5, what tests are most 
important?

 

Brad

 

From: Andrea Aime  
Sent: Sunday, 13 January 2019 7:45 PM
To: Brad Hards 
Cc: Jody Garnett ; GeoServer 

Subject: Re: TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

 

On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 11:50 PM mailto:br...@frogmouth.net> > wrote:

I took a look at the docker tools, and it looks like we can build an 
“everything” docker image, or a docker image per test suite. The process is 
slightly annoying, perhaps we want to publish our versions of the tests to an 
OSGEO Maven repo.

We don’t really care about “everything” in terms of ETS, 

 

We definitely don't want to run every test. But do we have to?

If building a custom docker image takes work, how bad would it be to build an 
image with everything, deploy it, and run just the tests we want?

I tried and the build failed due to lack of deps, I've inquired with OGC about 
their availability:

https://github.com/opengeospatial/teamengine-docker/issues/26

 

Anyhow, thinking out loud (and let's verify if feasible):

*   We build the full VM (or a custom one), ideally with a Jenkins build 
that updates, builds, and redeploys the image, possibly adding a well known 
user into it.
*   The image could be left running, or started up on demand
*   The tests are run periodically using the REST API

The advantage of using our own image are, in my mind:

*   No network latency, faster tests
*   No dependency on remote server avalability (think downtimes, upgrades, 
maintenance)
*   Better control on what we run, and have liberty on eventually using a 
custom version of some suite (version numbers are properties)

Control is an important bit for the feasibility of this approach, as we can do 
the upgrades when we can allocate time to also handle the fixes/adjustments to 
our code, the deploy data and configuaration, and the eventual CITE tests fixes

 

Cheers

Andrea

 

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V 
for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead GeoSolutions 
S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39 0584 962313 fax: 
+39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549 http://www.geo-solutions.it 
http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it 
--- Con riferimento alla 
normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 - Regolamento 
generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni circostanza 
inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali allegati, etc.) è 
un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i destinatario/i indicati dallo 
scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, 
ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene 
notizia. This email is intended only for the person or entity to which it is 
addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential or 
otherwise protected from disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European 
Regulation 2016/679 “GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or 
the information herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is 
prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake, please notify us 
immediately by telephone or e-mail. 

___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel


Re: [Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

2019-01-13 Thread Andrea Aime
On Sat, Jan 12, 2019 at 11:50 PM  wrote:

> I took a look at the docker tools, and it looks like we can build an
> “everything” docker image, or a docker image per test suite. The process is
> slightly annoying, perhaps we want to publish our versions of the tests to
> an OSGEO Maven repo.
>
> We don’t really care about “everything” in terms of ETS,


We definitely don't want to run every test. But do we have to?
If building a custom docker image takes work, how bad would it be to build
an image with everything, deploy it, and run just the tests we want?
I tried and the build failed due to lack of deps, I've inquired with OGC
about their availability:
https://github.com/opengeospatial/teamengine-docker/issues/26

Anyhow, thinking out loud (and let's verify if feasible):

   - We build the full VM (or a custom one), ideally with a Jenkins build
   that updates, builds, and redeploys the image, possibly adding a well known
   user into it.
   - The image could be left running, or started up on demand
   - The tests are run periodically using the REST API

The advantage of using our own image are, in my mind:

   - No network latency, faster tests
   - No dependency on remote server avalability (think downtimes, upgrades,
   maintenance)
   - Better control on what we run, and have liberty on eventually using a
   custom version of some suite (version numbers are properties)

Control is an important bit for the feasibility of this approach, as we can
do the upgrades when we can allocate time to also handle the
fixes/adjustments to our code, the deploy data and configuaration, and the
eventual CITE tests fixes

Cheers
Andrea

==

GeoServer Professional Services from the experts! Visit http://goo.gl/it488V
for more information. == Ing. Andrea Aime @geowolf Technical Lead
GeoSolutions S.A.S. Via di Montramito 3/A 55054 Massarosa (LU) phone: +39
0584 962313 fax: +39 0584 1660272 mob: +39 339 8844549
http://www.geo-solutions.it http://twitter.com/geosolutions_it
--- *Con riferimento
alla normativa sul trattamento dei dati personali (Reg. UE 2016/679 -
Regolamento generale sulla protezione dei dati “GDPR”), si precisa che ogni
circostanza inerente alla presente email (il suo contenuto, gli eventuali
allegati, etc.) è un dato la cui conoscenza è riservata al/i solo/i
destinatario/i indicati dallo scrivente. Se il messaggio Le è giunto per
errore, è tenuta/o a cancellarlo, ogni altra operazione è illecita. Le
sarei comunque grato se potesse darmene notizia. This email is intended
only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain
information that is privileged, confidential or otherwise protected from
disclosure. We remind that - as provided by European Regulation 2016/679
“GDPR” - copying, dissemination or use of this e-mail or the information
herein by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you
have received this email by mistake, please notify us immediately by
telephone or e-mail.*
___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel


[Geoserver-devel] TeamEngine Docker (was GeoServer 2019 budget)

2019-01-12 Thread bradh
I took a look at the docker tools, and it looks like we can build an 
“everything” docker image, or a docker image per test suite. The process is 
slightly annoying, perhaps we want to publish our versions of the tests to an 
OSGEO Maven repo.

We don’t really care about “everything” in terms of ETS, so it might help to 
narrow the problem if we can exclude and prioritise tests suites (either for 
the "everything" case, or for per-suite docker images).

As a starting point for discussion, here is my opinion, noting that some of the 
DGIWG and NSG stuff might be "special case". From (one of) the pom.xml:

1.13 - Priority 2

1.12 - Priority 2

1.12 - Priority 2

1.12 - Priority 2

1.32 - Priority 2

1.29 - Priority 1

0.1-SNAPSHOT - Priority 4

1.16 - Priority 1

1.24 - Priority 1

1.1 - Priority 3

1.17 - Priority 3

1.1 - No support?

1.25 - Priority 4

1.0 - Priority 3

0.3 - Priority 4

1.12 - Priority 3

0.5 - No support?

0.1 - No support?

0.8 - No support

0.8 - No support

1.6 - No support

1.4 - No support

1.13 - No support

1.13 - No support

1.7 - No support

1.10 - No support

1.0 - No support

1.3 - Priority 4

0.6 - Priority 3

0.4 - No support?

0.4 - No support?

0.1 - No support?

0.3 - No support?

0.2 - No support?

0.3 - No support?

0.1-SNAPSHOT - No 
support?
 



___
Geoserver-devel mailing list
Geoserver-devel@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/geoserver-devel