Do we have any success here.. ?
On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 8:32 AM Alex Schultz aschu...@mirantis.com wrote:
Vladimir,
Thanks. Can you point me to the error for perestroika? I'd be happy to
take a look as well. I spent most of Friday throwing various options at the
CI system to try and figure
Just to followup since the required packages are finally available, the
patches have been updated and are passing CI now.
https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202763/
-Alex
On Fri, Jul 24, 2015 at 8:32 AM, Alex Schultz aschu...@mirantis.com wrote:
Unfortunately we got stuck with package
Unfortunately we got stuck with package availability issues. It was
successful without using librarian packages for building, but since we need
to leverage packages the work to get packaged versions of the code has
unfortunately blocked this. I've got the packages built, but the time to
get them
Alex,
Yes, spec is much better place to introduce this. BTW, perestroika builds
new package for every commit and patch set and publishes them via HTTP.
Please check here
Alex,
As I've just found out this package available here [1] is not actually
build with your patch (instead it is from previous successful build). Looks
like perestroika can not build this package due to some environment
related issues. I've poked Dmitry Burmistrov to check it out.
However, your
Vladimir,
Thanks. Can you point me to the error for perestroika? I'd be happy to
take a look as well. I spent most of Friday throwing various options at the
CI system to try and figure out how to get the spec to work with the CI
fuel-library package building so perhaps there's a different way to
Hey Alex,
On Jul 17, 2015 4:32 AM, Aleksandr Didenko adide...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hi,
I think that we should provide a separate script that will fetch the
upstream modules into fuel-library/deployment/puppet/ directory. It will
allow us to have everything in a single place and use this script
I believe build_repo function is the best way to do this [0]. So for
fuel-library we'll need to run a shell script right from the repo before
'touch $$@'. We can make it either conditional ( test -f
./path/additional_build_script.sh bash ./path/additional_build_script.sh
) or as additional
Alex,
Gathering upstream modules certainly should be implemented as a separate
script so as to make it possible to use it wherever we need this (tests,
builds, etc.) According to builds there are two things
1) We have so called perestroika package build system (Dmitry Burmistrov
is a main
Hey Vladimir,
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 7:33 AM, Vladimir Kozhukalov
vkozhuka...@mirantis.com wrote:
Alex,
Gathering upstream modules certainly should be implemented as a separate
script so as to make it possible to use it wherever we need this (tests,
builds, etc.) According to builds there
Hi,
I think that we should provide a separate script that will fetch the
upstream modules into fuel-library/deployment/puppet/ directory. It will
allow us to have everything in a single place and use this script in ISO
build process and CI jobs.
Regards,
Alex
On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 11:17 PM,
Alex,
Great that you did this. Now I think I can prepare fuel-main patch to
invoke this script right before building fuel-library package. I'll add you
to review it. Is it ok if I do this monday morning?
Vladimir Kozhukalov
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 5:51 PM, Alex Schultz aschu...@mirantis.com
Not until we start using it then any ci that tests with that module will
validate the modules inclusion. You can check the output of the jobs as we
are printing what modules are managed by librarian.
-Alex
On Jul 17, 2015 6:17 PM, Andrew Woodward xar...@gmail.com wrote:
Fantastic, do we have
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 12:24 PM Vladimir Kozhukalov
vkozhuka...@mirantis.com wrote:
Alex,
Great that you did this. Now I think I can prepare fuel-main patch to
invoke this script right before building fuel-library package. I'll add you
to review it. Is it ok if I do this monday morning?
Hey Vladimir,
So I've been playing with it at the moment because I think the better place
to do the script execution is as part of the build process controlled by
the fuel-library7.0 spec file[0]. It seems to be a valid way to do it (and
would work for our CI jobs to) but the issue i'm running
Hey All,
I've figured it out without having to modify the fuel-main build code. I've
updated the fuel-library spec with a build action that invokes the script
to pull down external modules. Please take some time to review the two
reviews out there for this change to see if there are any issues
Fantastic, do we have some way to validate that the module was pulled in
properly as part of fuel-library CI?
On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 2:48 PM Alex Schultz aschu...@mirantis.com wrote:
Hey All,
I've figured it out without having to modify the fuel-main build code.
I've updated the
17 matches
Mail list logo
