On Tuesday, 23 September 2014, Grover Blue <[email protected]> wrote:
> I'd like to weigh in on this. The maven-based job type is great for quick > or single-dimensional project, especially when you know the scope will not > change. I tend to prefer freestyle because of flexibility. > > In reality, the solution is to just have one project type with varied > initialization types. I'm pretty sure that's happening in the backend, Ha! So not the case. The evil job type sets up a remoting connection to within the maven process and this lets Jenkins muck about. Regular jobs fork a shell on the slave doing the "obvious" thing... Ie Jenkins drives the build Maven jobs have two back-to-back remoting channels and "drive" Jenkins to an extent When I say its evil, I'm not joking but > the details are hidden (needs confirmation). > > BTW, in order to have artifacts listed one has to enable artifact > archiving, not publishing. > > Everything works now (except for the job stalling on deployment to a > self-signed cert GF 4.1 installation. :) > > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 2:43 PM, Stephen Connolly < > [email protected] <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > FYI my aim is to supersede the evil job type with some enhanced reporting > > in what is currently called the literate job type. > > > > That would mean you'd get the per-module reporting. > > > > The current evil job type's other "killer" feature is automatic > downstream > > job triggering... Which is actually broken as it does not take into > account > > the local repo that the -SNAPSHOTs may or may not have been deployed into > > and assumes that `package` is the same as `deploy` as far as triggering > is > > concerned as well as ignoring that deployment might be to a staging repo, > > so the artifacts may not be available downstream... However, despite > being > > fundamentally broken at every level, you would be surprised how many > people > > feel locked into the evil job type because of this... > > > > In short, there is so many issues with it that I cannot recommend its > > use... The only semi useful feature from my PoV is per module reporting. > > > > (Sadly my day job has me having to support the evil job type from time to > > time... Though usually those tickets get picked up by Kohsuke if I start > > another "evil job type" tirade ;-) ) > > > > On Tuesday, 23 September 2014, Curtis Rueden <[email protected] > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > Hi James, > > > > > > > I can no longer see "Deploy artifacts to Maven repository" > > > > as a post-build action. > > > > > > Just add a build step that does "mvn deploy" or similar. > > > > > > > Dare I ask what I'm missing having chosen the full-fat option..? > > > > > > If you're asking what you cannot do with freeform jobs: I don't know of > > > anything. I think the Maven-style job is just a convenience to get very > > > basic CI set up as quickly as possible, for people without much > technical > > > know-how. > > > > > > If you're asking for more details on limitations of the Maven-style > job: > > > it's been awhile, but IIRC my group had several problems. One such was > > that > > > the Jenkins Git plugin did not fire Maven-style jobs upon receiving the > > > push notification from GitHub. Another really serious problem is that > you > > > can't add arbitrary shell script as a post-build step. And needing to > do > > > this is, in my experience, extremely common. > > > > > > It wouldn't be that big of an issue if there were an easy way to later > > > "convert" a Maven-style job to a freestyle job should the need arise. > But > > > try a web search on that topic and you'll see what I mean about it > being > > a > > > highly non-trivial problem. > > > > > > Regards, > > > Curtis > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:56 AM, James Green <[email protected] > <javascript:;> > > > <javascript:;>> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > News to me. Ironically I'm just setting up a new Jenkins job so tried > > the > > > > freeform style - I can no longer see "Deploy artifacts to Maven > > > repository" > > > > as a post-build action. > > > > > > > > Dare I ask what I'm missing having chosen the full-fat option..? > > > > > > > > On 23 September 2014 14:02, Curtis Rueden <[email protected] > <javascript:;> > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > The Maven style build will also lock you in to a small subset of > > > > Jenkins's > > > > > usual features. And when you eventually need a feature not > available > > > > with a > > > > > Maven-style build, there is no conversion path from Maven-style to > > > > > Freestyle -- you have to recreate the job (losing the build history > > > > etc.). > > > > > > > > > > -Curtis > > > > > On Sep 23, 2014 7:33 AM, "Stephen Connolly" < > > > > > [email protected] <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Freestyle does not mess with your build and change it from > building > > > the > > > > > way > > > > > > maven intends. Google "stephen's java adventures Jenkins maven > > > > considered > > > > > > evil" for a more detailed discussion > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 23 September 2014, James Green < > > [email protected] <javascript:;> > > > <javascript:;>> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23 September 2014 02:23, Curtis Rueden <[email protected] > <javascript:;> > > > <javascript:;> > > > > > > > <javascript:;>> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Also, stay away from the Jenkins "Maven" style job. Freestyle > > is > > > > more > > > > > > > > flexible and less buggy. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Based on ..? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Sent from my phone > > > > > > -- > “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of > their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks...will > deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on > the continent their fathers conquered... The issuing power should be taken > from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs." > -- Thomas Jefferson > > "Government big enough to supply everything...is big enough to take > everything you have. The course of history shows that as a government > grows, liberty decreases" --- Thomas Jefferson > > www.CampaignForLiberty.org > -- Sent from my phone
