You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@continuum.apache.org by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> on 2010/12/06 03:34:14 UTC
Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Took a while for me to trace the
installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
encapsulated in so many layers.
Implementation proposal:
There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
-CHUABLE
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hello Brett & Wendy,
Brett, we are definitely on the same page :D
Brett, Wendy: Any more thoughts on this?? May I start implementing??
--- On Wed, 12/8/10, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
From: Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 9:28 PM
On 08/12/2010, at 7:15 PM, Marc Jansen Chua wrote:
> Hello Wendy,
>
> I'm pressuming on what you said meant that the master and the agents are have separate installations and can't be mixed during build.
>
> From my understanding, when doing "parallel builds" continuum will be using the installations of the master, since the improvement is for "distributed builds", the installations would come from the build agents' installations + from the build environment's installations where the build agents' are group in which the installations would be for the agents. So during a "distributed build", continuum will be communicating with the build agent on the installations that were configured, continuum would just be relaying the installation set for the build agent to use in where the build agent is on (Linux, Windows).
If I understand what you've said, I think we agree - I'll just re-state to make sure.
- each installation has an ID (env var name, Maven installation name, etc)
- if an installation in the build agent with a given ID has a path there, it overrides the installation from the master with the same ID
- otherwise, installations from the master are used
> --- On Wed, 12/8/10, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't find it at the moment, but I thought Brett had a JIRA issue
> open about not passing values (for things like directory paths) from
> the master to the agent, but instead just passing a key and letting
> the agent have its own value.
Yep, I think that's the case for maven installations and local repositories (which is a separate thing). The former should be taken care of if its done as above. Environment variables are inherently arbitrary locations with a well-known key to use :)
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
On 08/12/2010, at 7:15 PM, Marc Jansen Chua wrote:
> Hello Wendy,
>
> I'm pressuming on what you said meant that the master and the agents are have separate installations and can't be mixed during build.
>
> From my understanding, when doing "parallel builds" continuum will be using the installations of the master, since the improvement is for "distributed builds", the installations would come from the build agents' installations + from the build environment's installations where the build agents' are group in which the installations would be for the agents. So during a "distributed build", continuum will be communicating with the build agent on the installations that were configured, continuum would just be relaying the installation set for the build agent to use in where the build agent is on (Linux, Windows).
If I understand what you've said, I think we agree - I'll just re-state to make sure.
- each installation has an ID (env var name, Maven installation name, etc)
- if an installation in the build agent with a given ID has a path there, it overrides the installation from the master with the same ID
- otherwise, installations from the master are used
> --- On Wed, 12/8/10, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I can't find it at the moment, but I thought Brett had a JIRA issue
> open about not passing values (for things like directory paths) from
> the master to the agent, but instead just passing a key and letting
> the agent have its own value.
Yep, I think that's the case for maven installations and local repositories (which is a separate thing). The former should be taken care of if its done as above. Environment variables are inherently arbitrary locations with a well-known key to use :)
- Brett
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hello Wendy,
I'm pressuming on what you said meant that the master and the agents are have separate installations and can't be mixed during build.
>From my understanding, when doing "parallel builds" continuum will be using the installations of the master, since the improvement is for "distributed builds", the installations would come from the build agents' installations + from the build environment's installations where the build agents' are group in which the installations would be for the agents. So during a "distributed build", continuum will be communicating with the build agent on the installations that were configured, continuum would just be relaying the installation set for the build agent to use in where the build agent is on (Linux, Windows).
What do you think Wendy?? does this answer the problem?? :D
P.S. More discussions & suggestions would be very much appreciated :D
Thanks a lot,
Chuable
--- On Wed, 12/8/10, Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com> wrote:
From: Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Wednesday, December 8, 2010, 9:25 AM
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Brett,
>
> Assuming that individual configuration of installation for build agents is supported.
There is no requirement that all build agents in a group be identical.
> Build Agents are grouped into Build Agent Groups, and Build Agent Groups together with a set of Installations are grouped into Build Environments, so if in the case of an environmental variable "HOME" that both the build agent & the build environment have but with different values(i.e. build agent's config of HOME=/home/dummy, build environment's config of HOME=/home/dummy2) shows that installation duplicate is possible. My implementation would be that the build agent's installation would override the collision of installation of the build environment. Therefore when building, that single build agent would be using HOME=/home/dummy, for other build agents that have no collision with the build environment's installation, they will be using HOME=/home/dummy2 when building.
I can't find it at the moment, but I thought Brett had a JIRA issue
open about not passing values (for things like directory paths) from
the master to the agent, but instead just passing a key and letting
the agent have its own value.
For example, there's no way a Master running on Linux should be
passing the value of its home directory down to an agent that may be
running on Windows. (And iirc Brett thought it was a security issue
to be passing a directory path in the first place.)
--
Wendy
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for
build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Wendy Smoak <ws...@gmail.com>.
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 11:57 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Brett,
>
> Assuming that individual configuration of installation for build agents is supported.
There is no requirement that all build agents in a group be identical.
> Build Agents are grouped into Build Agent Groups, and Build Agent Groups together with a set of Installations are grouped into Build Environments, so if in the case of an environmental variable "HOME" that both the build agent & the build environment have but with different values(i.e. build agent's config of HOME=/home/dummy, build environment's config of HOME=/home/dummy2) shows that installation duplicate is possible. My implementation would be that the build agent's installation would override the collision of installation of the build environment. Therefore when building, that single build agent would be using HOME=/home/dummy, for other build agents that have no collision with the build environment's installation, they will be using HOME=/home/dummy2 when building.
I can't find it at the moment, but I thought Brett had a JIRA issue
open about not passing values (for things like directory paths) from
the master to the agent, but instead just passing a key and letting
the agent have its own value.
For example, there's no way a Master running on Linux should be
passing the value of its home directory down to an agent that may be
running on Windows. (And iirc Brett thought it was a security issue
to be passing a directory path in the first place.)
--
Wendy
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hi guys,
Any more suggestions or feedbacks regarding the proposed improvement implementation on CONTINUUM-2592??
Thanks,
Chuable
--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 12:57 PM
Hello Brett,
Assuming that individual configuration of installation for build agents is supported.
Build Agents are grouped into Build Agent Groups, and Build Agent Groups together with a set of Installations are grouped into Build Environments, so if in the case of an environmental variable "HOME" that both the build agent & the build environment have but with different values(i.e. build agent's config of HOME=/home/dummy, build environment's config of HOME=/home/dummy2) shows that installation duplicate is possible. My implementation would be that the build agent's installation would override the collision of installation of the build environment. Therefore when building, that single build agent would be using HOME=/home/dummy, for other build agents that have no collision with the build environment's installation, they will be using HOME=/home/dummy2 when building.
P.S. More suggestions & feedbacks will be much appreciated...
Thanks
Chuable
--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
From: Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 11:48 AM
I'm not sure there should be any duplication. The ones on the agent will be the ones specific to that machine, the master things like MAVEN_OPTS settings which might be common.
Are the installations keyed in some way that they can use the same ID if they are intended to "override" the master settings for a given build agent?
On 07/12/2010, at 1:47 PM, Marc Jansen Chua wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> Forgot to mention on the duplicate installation case. I am planning to give more weight on the installations in build agents because configuring installations in build agents can cater to customizability in micro-managing build agents compared to build environment installations which affects all(macro-managing) build agents' installations. So in the case of duplicate installation between the build agent in a build environment and the build environment the build agent is in, the build agent's installation will overlap the build environment's installation.
>
> Is there any better way than the implementation that I currently propose??
> Thoughts & ideas would count a lot :D
>
> Thanks,
> Chuable
>
> --- On Tue, 12/7/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 10:23 AM
>
> Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
> make sure that it is clearly documented :)
>
> Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
> JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
> installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
> installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
> the build environment?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hello Deng,
>>
>> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
>>
>> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
>>
>> - Chuable
>>
>> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
>> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
>> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>>
>> Hi Chuable,
>>
>> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
>> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
>> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
>> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
>> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Deng
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Took a while for me to trace the
>>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Implementation proposal:
>>>
>>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
>>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -CHUABLE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hello Brett,
Assuming that individual configuration of installation for build agents is supported.
Build Agents are grouped into Build Agent Groups, and Build Agent Groups together with a set of Installations are grouped into Build Environments, so if in the case of an environmental variable "HOME" that both the build agent & the build environment have but with different values(i.e. build agent's config of HOME=/home/dummy, build environment's config of HOME=/home/dummy2) shows that installation duplicate is possible. My implementation would be that the build agent's installation would override the collision of installation of the build environment. Therefore when building, that single build agent would be using HOME=/home/dummy, for other build agents that have no collision with the build environment's installation, they will be using HOME=/home/dummy2 when building.
P.S. More suggestions & feedbacks will be much appreciated...
Thanks
Chuable
--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Brett Porter <br...@apache.org> wrote:
From: Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 11:48 AM
I'm not sure there should be any duplication. The ones on the agent will be the ones specific to that machine, the master things like MAVEN_OPTS settings which might be common.
Are the installations keyed in some way that they can use the same ID if they are intended to "override" the master settings for a given build agent?
On 07/12/2010, at 1:47 PM, Marc Jansen Chua wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> Forgot to mention on the duplicate installation case. I am planning to give more weight on the installations in build agents because configuring installations in build agents can cater to customizability in micro-managing build agents compared to build environment installations which affects all(macro-managing) build agents' installations. So in the case of duplicate installation between the build agent in a build environment and the build environment the build agent is in, the build agent's installation will overlap the build environment's installation.
>
> Is there any better way than the implementation that I currently propose??
> Thoughts & ideas would count a lot :D
>
> Thanks,
> Chuable
>
> --- On Tue, 12/7/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 10:23 AM
>
> Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
> make sure that it is clearly documented :)
>
> Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
> JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
> installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
> installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
> the build environment?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hello Deng,
>>
>> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
>>
>> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
>>
>> - Chuable
>>
>> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
>> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
>> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>>
>> Hi Chuable,
>>
>> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
>> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
>> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
>> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
>> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Deng
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Took a while for me to trace the
>>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Implementation proposal:
>>>
>>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
>>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -CHUABLE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Brett Porter <br...@apache.org>.
I'm not sure there should be any duplication. The ones on the agent will be the ones specific to that machine, the master things like MAVEN_OPTS settings which might be common.
Are the installations keyed in some way that they can use the same ID if they are intended to "override" the master settings for a given build agent?
On 07/12/2010, at 1:47 PM, Marc Jansen Chua wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> Forgot to mention on the duplicate installation case. I am planning to give more weight on the installations in build agents because configuring installations in build agents can cater to customizability in micro-managing build agents compared to build environment installations which affects all(macro-managing) build agents' installations. So in the case of duplicate installation between the build agent in a build environment and the build environment the build agent is in, the build agent's installation will overlap the build environment's installation.
>
> Is there any better way than the implementation that I currently propose??
> Thoughts & ideas would count a lot :D
>
> Thanks,
> Chuable
>
> --- On Tue, 12/7/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 10:23 AM
>
> Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
> make sure that it is clearly documented :)
>
> Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
> JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
> installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
> installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
> the build environment?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Hello Deng,
>>
>> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
>>
>> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
>>
>> - Chuable
>>
>> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
>> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
>> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
>> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>>
>> Hi Chuable,
>>
>> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
>> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
>> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
>> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
>> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Deng
>>
>> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>> Took a while for me to trace the
>>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Implementation proposal:
>>>
>>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
>>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>>
>>>
>>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -CHUABLE
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
--
Brett Porter
brett@apache.org
http://brettporter.wordpress.com/
http://au.linkedin.com/in/brettporter
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hello Deng,
Forgot to mention on the duplicate installation case. I am planning to give more weight on the installations in build agents because configuring installations in build agents can cater to customizability in micro-managing build agents compared to build environment installations which affects all(macro-managing) build agents' installations. So in the case of duplicate installation between the build agent in a build environment and the build environment the build agent is in, the build agent's installation will overlap the build environment's installation.
Is there any better way than the implementation that I currently propose??
Thoughts & ideas would count a lot :D
Thanks,
Chuable
--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 10:23 AM
Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
make sure that it is clearly documented :)
Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
the build environment?
Thanks,
Deng
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
>
> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
>
> - Chuable
>
> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>
> Hi Chuable,
>
> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Took a while for me to trace the
>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>
>>
>> Implementation proposal:
>>
>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>
>>
>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -CHUABLE
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for
build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>.
Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
make sure that it is clearly documented :)
Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
the build environment?
Thanks,
Deng
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
>
> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
>
> - Chuable
>
> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>
> Hi Chuable,
>
> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Took a while for me to trace the
>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>
>>
>> Implementation proposal:
>>
>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>
>>
>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -CHUABLE
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com>.
Hello Deng,
I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration process.
The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use the installations from their build environments during build.
- Chuable
--- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org> wrote:
From: Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
Hi Chuable,
How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
Thanks,
Deng
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Took a while for me to trace the
> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
> encapsulated in so many layers.
>
>
> Implementation proposal:
>
> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>
>
> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>
>
>
>
> -CHUABLE
>
>
>
Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for
build agents to use installations in their config file
Posted by Deng Ching <oc...@apache.org>.
Hi Chuable,
How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
Thanks,
Deng
On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <ch...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Took a while for me to trace the
> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
> encapsulated in so many layers.
>
>
> Implementation proposal:
>
> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from the build
> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>
>
> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the improvement
>
>
>
>
> -CHUABLE
>
>
>