[foreman-dev] Slave disk space errors

[Dominic Cleal]

A number of Jenkins test jobs will have failed within the last hour or
so due to slaves running out of disk space. This is mostly due to large
node_modules directories causing job workspaces to expand rapidly.

I've deployed a fix to clean them up and have freed space on slaves so
jobs should be back to normal. Please re-run any that failed for space
reasons.

-- 
Dominic Cleal
domi...@cleal.org

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [foreman-dev] Possible Feature Requst: Discussion: EC2 Subnet Display - include comment/description field in seperate view

[Marek Hulán]

On Tuesday 09 of August 2016 08:22:38 Matt Darcy wrote:
> I've been doing a little bit of POC work on foreman 1.11 with EC2 (not
> bothered moving to 1.12 for this POC as it's not really version specific).
> 
> when building/modifying a host the EC2 compute plugin pulls a list of
> subnets assigned to the account/compute resource associated to the foreman
> compute resource target. this is nice and simple to use, however some
> recent experience of what is in essence quite a small AWS estate, 6 VPCs,
> at 9 subnets each, this become quite scappy as the list of 54 IP subnets,
> totally out of any order was presented to the support team and without any
> meaningful information about the subnets removed some of the ease and
> management selling points that using foreman for the project been built on.
> 
> In the POC I started looking at the ability to pull not only the IP CIDR
> blocks but the comment field associated with the CIDR blocks.
> 
> My initial tests look like it's possible to get the info, and I'd imagine
> it's not too hard to create a second display box next to the IP list to
> list the comments, or include a second field in the single box, but I'm
> nowhere near that yet
> 
> I thought I'd open up a short discussion (hopefully) about this as a
> feature request and see if there is anything I've not considered
> implication wise or anything I'd not seen the bigger picture on before
> raising the feature request and looking to work on it and gather some
> people to work on it.
> 
> I'm currently looking at foreman for a much bigger EC2 deployment, which
> will have many more subnets and without something human readable it will be
> a much harder sell to use going forward.
> 
> thoughts ?
> 
> Matt

Hello

that sounds as a good addition to me. I'd prefer combining into a single 
select box, the second one would be hard to get in sync. I can imagine the 
comment being too long so some trimming might be considered.

--
Marek

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Re: [foreman-dev] Deprecate EL6?

[Ewoud Kohl van Wijngaarden]

On Mon, Aug 08, 2016 at 06:34:01PM +0100, Greg Sutcliffe wrote:
> On 8 August 2016 at 15:41, Ohad Levy  wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Aug 8, 2016 at 5:33 PM, Eric D Helms  wrote:
> >
> >> This thread has seen a revival with many points being made on both sides.
> >> However, things have gone cold for nearly a week now and there are
> >> processes and decisions that hinge on the outcome with respect to users and
> >> developers alike. Are we to assume that what has been done is done and this
> >> discussion is moot? Some finality in this matter would be greatly
> >> appreciated to either continue forward with EL6 builds and preparing all of
> >> our ecosystem users for the 1.14 release to migrate or beginning now to
> >> tell users they are SOL and to start testing transition and migration while
> >> we work out and test the best way for them to do so.
> >>
> >
> > I strongly prefer deprecating EL6 with Foreman 1.14, and would ask to
> > revert the el6 changes in nighties.
> >
> 
> I did ask previously to confirm if the cons to keeping EL6 were still as
> simple as suggested on May 10th. I've heard no contradiction of that, so my
> preference also goes to reverting the change in the nightlies.

Supporting EL6 is little effort for the projects I'm involved so I have
no objections to formally deprecating EL6 on 1.13 and dropping support
in 1.14.

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.