Jez, Again, you have carefully crafted a loosing scenario, which are easy to do, just lay out a bunch of bad practices a your in . You seem to be interested in A but ignore B and C. If you can rebuild A, why not B and C? In this scenario you have crippled Maven and would need to rely on a Build Management system to have mapped the relationships and have captured the meta-data. If the relationships are mapped between A,B & C then you would have some record of which ones were used. But, lets play devils advocate and say we weren't following our process and people were skipping steps. Your scenario is the *we didn't know* one and *can we go back*?
In your case you are treating B and C as *external* dependencies and you seem to assume they aren't hitting any milestones and *releasing*. As external deps (separate SVN roots) we would never rely on a SNAPSHOT version of them. In a CD world we would live with the most recent *release* they have until they delivered new value. So, if we really wanted their latest SNAPSHOT we would get it released so we can consume it. If it were in our repo root, we can go back and recreate the whole repo and rebuild everything. Only *our* stuff can be SNAPSHOT (again, we're doing the work). If we take your logic to it's extreme are we saying the CD can not tolerate a broken build? It can't possible be delivered! You've abandoned Tags and Branches so I assume you have a fall forward mentality (or roll back). In the case of a broken build in a CI system using a Build Management System we should be able to very quickly get back to a good build which could then be delivered. What's more is I feel you are taking a narrow look at things. A world of only SCC and Maven with no Build Management System. In this world you would need to enable uniquely ID's snapshots in your Binary Repository and at the very least retain your build logs, then you could go back to that build of A and look at the log to see exactly which SNAPSHOTs were used. Now you can have big continuous *jello* view of the world and still have a detailed bill-of-materials. Not that you'd need it mind you since your artifact would have been uniquely ID'd and stored (presumably as a complete package somewhere) and now you don't even have to rebuild, just go back and grab it and go from there. While this is not how I'd use Maven, if you are willing to throw disk space at the problem, so you can just keep everything and you're all set. ________________________________ Curt Yanko | Continuous Integration Services | UnitedHealth Group IT Making IT Happen, one build at a time, 600 times a day -----Original Message----- From: jhumble [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Continuous Delivery and Maven Hi Curtis I'm the first to admit I'm no Maven expert. So please let me just confirm. Let's assume I am working on project A which depends on projects B and C. For the sake of argument, let's say that the source code for A, B and C have separate roots in SVN, and are usually checked out independently. The CI system builds A at version 50 using snapshot dependencies on B and C, which are fetched from a central snapshot repository. Later, there are multiple updates to projects B and C which result in new versions of them becoming available. Say I now check out the source code to project A to version 50, because I want to try and debug some issue that cropped up in a performance testing environment, and I run a maven build. Will that use the latest versions of the snapshots from the repo, or the versions that were originally fetched when it was run on the CI system? Can I even find out exactly which versions from svn the snapshots of B and C came from that were used by the CI system to generate the original build of A? Thanks, Jez. On 7 November 2010 20:10, Yanko, Curtis [via Maven] < [email protected]<ml-node%2B3254520-103656 [email protected]> > wrote: > Very interesting discussion. With all due respect to Mr. Humble, and I > am a big fan of CD, I am going to venture to say that you don't > understand Maven very well. As a thought experiment, you are correct > in saying that a build based on snapshots is not reproducible. As a > more practical matter however, I feel it is. > > Dependencies come in two flavors, our and theirs (internal and 3rd > party). If, all of *our* dependencies are SNAPSHOT (we're doing the > developing) and all of *theirs* are 'versioned' then the build is in > fact reproducible assuming you build everything from a particular repo > version even with the default auto-update setting (in fact, it's > required). > ________________________________ > > Curt Yanko | Continuous Integration Services | UnitedHealth Group IT > Making IT Happen, one build at a time, 600 times a day > > -----Original Message----- > From: jhumble [mailto:[hidden > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=0>] > > Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 11:15 AM > To: [hidden email] > <http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=1> > Subject: RE: Continuous Delivery and Maven > > > Hey Todd > > The whole point of continuous delivery is that every check-in creates > a potential release candidate. > > When you're doing continuous deployment, you could be releasing > multiple times a day, so you don't bother cutting branches or tagging > or any of that stuff because of the overhead. I'd rather not get into > the justification for this process on this thread - but I wrote a book > on it if you're interested: > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0321601912 and many other people have > blogged about it. > > You're right that creating a concrete release for each commit could > potentially use up a lot of space - but that's fine, you can just > delete the older ones. What this *does* mean in turn though is that it > is essential to be able to recreate any given build given the version > in source control it came from, and this is where Maven falls down. > Snapshots just aren't suitable because they aren't reproducible: what > the snapshot looks like depends not only on what versions of the > dependencies are available at the time the snapshot is created, but > also what Maven's configuration and plug-ins happen to be at the time > you run it (assuming Maven is configured to auto-update - the > default). I can't revert back to a particular revision in version > control, run maven, and be sure that the artifact it generates is > identical to the one it created when the commit was initially triggered. > > Ideally what I'd like is for Maven to explicitly support the > continuous delivery model and provide snapshots that are reproducible. > Failing that, a guide to configuring Maven so that its binaries are > reproducible (for example by switching off auto-update, and having > sufficient metadata stored in pom files and Maven's artifacts > repository to know what the state of each of the dependencies was at any given time. > -- > View this message in context: > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Continuous-Delivery-and-Maven-tp32453 > 70<http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Continuous-Delivery-and-Maven-tp32 > 45370?by-user=t> > p3254090.html > Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=2> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=3> > > > This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or > proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity > to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the > intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is > hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of > this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, > please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=4> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden > email]<http://user/SendEmail.jtp?type=node&node=3254520&i=5> > > > > ------------------------------ > View message @ > http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Continuous-Delivery-and-Maven-tp32453 > 70p3254520.html To unsubscribe from Continuous Delivery and Maven, > click here<http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/template/TplServlet.jtp?tpl=unsubs cribe_by_code&node=3245370&code=amV6QGplemh1bWJsZS5uZXR8MzI0NTM3MHwtMTg4 MjM1NzMyNA==>. > > > -- Jez Humble Co-author, *Continuous Delivery <http://continuousdelivery.com/>* http://continuousdelivery.com/ http://jezhumble.net/ -- View this message in context: http://maven.40175.n5.nabble.com/Continuous-Delivery-and-Maven-tp3245370 p3254534.html Sent from the Maven - Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. This e-mail, including attachments, may include confidential and/or proprietary information, and may be used only by the person or entity to which it is addressed. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient or his or her authorized agent, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this e-mail is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender by replying to this message and delete this e-mail immediately. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
