You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@tuscany.apache.org by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> on 2010/11/26 08:50:59 UTC
What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn commit:
r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:20 AM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> Author: antelder
> Date: Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
> New Revision: 1039071
>
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1039071&view=rev
> Log:
> Add a build profile to build all thats necessary for the all distro as quickly as possible, so no tests get run, intended mainly for Hudson to try to get some nightly builds published more often
>
> Modified:
> tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>
> Modified: tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1039071&r1=1039070&r2=1039071&view=diff
> ==============================================================================
> --- tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml (original)
> +++ tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
> @@ -669,6 +669,23 @@ org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly:org.apac
> </profile>
>
> <profile>
> + <id>all-distro</id>
> + <properties>
> + <skipTests>true</skipTests>
> + <buildZips>true</buildZips>
> + </properties>
> + <modules>
> + <module>maven/maven-tuscany-plugin</module>
> + <module>modules</module>
> + <module>features</module>
> + <module>distribution/all</module>
> + </modules>
> + <build>
> + <defaultGoal>install</defaultGoal>
> + </build>
> + </profile>
> +
> + <profile>
> <id>base</id>
> <modules>
> <module>modules/assembly</module>
>
>
>
The 2.x code base has been growing and the time to perform a full
build has grown as well, and I know some of us are relying on Hudson
to perform a full build with all tests to make sure the code is stable
and no regressions have been introduced.
>From the comments on this commit, it seems that we are going to start
skipping tests in Hudson builds. I don't think it's a good idea to
start building AND publishing snapshots of modules that are not even
tested.
Thoughts ?
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 4:07 PM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:44 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
>>>>> people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
>>>>>
>>>>> The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
>>>>> out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
>>>>> running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
>>>>> issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
>>>>> it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
>>>>> published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
>>>>> change.
>>>>>
>>>>> One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
>>>>> Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
>>>>> the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
>>>>> archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
>>>>> the other big jars can be quite slow too.
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
>>>>> but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
>>>>> the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
>>>>> after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
>>>>> could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
>>>>> install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
>>>>> deploying something incomplete or broken.
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
>>>>> splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
>>>>> but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
>>>>> really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
>>>>> else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
>>>>>
>>>>> ...ant
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I still think that we SHOULD NOT deploy SNAPSHOT if the build didn't
>>>> pass the tests.
>>>>
>>>> As for the archive, I don't think we need them anymore, and we can
>>>> link the nightly build directly to the "published distribution" from
>>>> the snapshot repository [1].
>>>>
>>>
>>> How can we do those two things without enabling Hudson archiving which
>>> will mean the build will nearly always fail?
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>
>> There has been recent discussion on the archive issue [1] but no
>> solution yet. My fastest local full build takes 30 minutes. On Hudson
>> it regularly takes many hours. The majority of this extra time seems
>> to be wasted on the archive task. This is an issue for Hudson in
>> general.
>>
>> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201011.mbox/browser
>>
>> Simon
>>
>> --
>> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
>> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>>
>
> I've been struggling to make useful suggestions here but I've been
> mulling this over today and on balance I'm personally more interested
> in seeing Hudson run the complete build (including tests) successfully
> than having Hudson publish artifacts. If required we can always
> publish the artifacts manually.
>
> If we went this route I'm assuming, based on what Ant posted
> previously, that we could turn off archiving and let the full build
> run,
>
> Just my 2c
>
> Simon
>
Yes we could do a build that runs all the tests with archiving and
publishing turned off and that should be quicker. We could also have
another build thats dependent on that first one completing
successfully which does a deploy of the modules and distributions so
that they go into the snapshot repository. I'll set up a couple of
hudson jobs to do those two and see how well they run.
...ant
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 9:53 AM, Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:44 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
>>>> people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
>>>>
>>>> The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
>>>> out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
>>>> running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
>>>> issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
>>>> it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
>>>> published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
>>>> change.
>>>>
>>>> One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
>>>> Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
>>>> the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
>>>> archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
>>>> the other big jars can be quite slow too.
>>>>
>>>> There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
>>>> but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
>>>> the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
>>>> after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
>>>> could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
>>>> install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
>>>> deploying something incomplete or broken.
>>>>
>>>> It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
>>>> splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
>>>> but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
>>>> really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
>>>> else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
>>>>
>>>> ...ant
>>>>
>>>
>>> I still think that we SHOULD NOT deploy SNAPSHOT if the build didn't
>>> pass the tests.
>>>
>>> As for the archive, I don't think we need them anymore, and we can
>>> link the nightly build directly to the "published distribution" from
>>> the snapshot repository [1].
>>>
>>
>> How can we do those two things without enabling Hudson archiving which
>> will mean the build will nearly always fail?
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
> There has been recent discussion on the archive issue [1] but no
> solution yet. My fastest local full build takes 30 minutes. On Hudson
> it regularly takes many hours. The majority of this extra time seems
> to be wasted on the archive task. This is an issue for Hudson in
> general.
>
> [1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201011.mbox/browser
>
> Simon
>
> --
> Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
> Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
>
I've been struggling to make useful suggestions here but I've been
mulling this over today and on balance I'm personally more interested
in seeing Hudson run the complete build (including tests) successfully
than having Hudson publish artifacts. If required we can always
publish the artifacts manually.
If we went this route I'm assuming, based on what Ant posted
previously, that we could turn off archiving and let the full build
run,
Just my 2c
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Simon Laws <si...@googlemail.com>.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 7:44 AM, ant elder <an...@apache.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
>>> people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
>>>
>>> The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
>>> out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
>>> running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
>>> issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
>>> it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
>>> published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
>>> change.
>>>
>>> One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
>>> Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
>>> the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
>>> archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
>>> the other big jars can be quite slow too.
>>>
>>> There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
>>> but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
>>> the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
>>> after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
>>> could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
>>> install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
>>> deploying something incomplete or broken.
>>>
>>> It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
>>> splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
>>> but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
>>> really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
>>> else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
>>>
>>> ...ant
>>>
>>
>> I still think that we SHOULD NOT deploy SNAPSHOT if the build didn't
>> pass the tests.
>>
>> As for the archive, I don't think we need them anymore, and we can
>> link the nightly build directly to the "published distribution" from
>> the snapshot repository [1].
>>
>
> How can we do those two things without enabling Hudson archiving which
> will mean the build will nearly always fail?
>
> ...ant
>
There has been recent discussion on the archive issue [1] but no
solution yet. My fastest local full build takes 30 minutes. On Hudson
it regularly takes many hours. The majority of this extra time seems
to be wasted on the archive task. This is an issue for Hudson in
general.
[1] http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/www-builds/201011.mbox/browser
Simon
--
Apache Tuscany committer: tuscany.apache.org
Co-author of a book about Tuscany and SCA: tuscanyinaction.com
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by ant elder <an...@apache.org>.
On Mon, Nov 29, 2010 at 1:43 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
>> people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
>>
>> The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
>> out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
>> running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
>> issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
>> it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
>> published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
>> change.
>>
>> One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
>> Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
>> the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
>> archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
>> the other big jars can be quite slow too.
>>
>> There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
>> but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
>> the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
>> after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
>> could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
>> install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
>> deploying something incomplete or broken.
>>
>> It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
>> splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
>> but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
>> really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
>> else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
>>
>> ...ant
>>
>
> I still think that we SHOULD NOT deploy SNAPSHOT if the build didn't
> pass the tests.
>
> As for the archive, I don't think we need them anymore, and we can
> link the nightly build directly to the "published distribution" from
> the snapshot repository [1].
>
How can we do those two things without enabling Hudson archiving which
will mean the build will nearly always fail?
...ant
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Sun, Nov 28, 2010 at 2:30 PM, ant elder <an...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
> people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
>
> The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
> out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
> running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
> issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
> it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
> published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
> change.
>
> One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
> Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
> the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
> archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
> the other big jars can be quite slow too.
>
> There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
> but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
> the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
> after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
> could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
> install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
> deploying something incomplete or broken.
>
> It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
> splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
> but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
> really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
> else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
>
> ...ant
>
I still think that we SHOULD NOT deploy SNAPSHOT if the build didn't
pass the tests.
As for the archive, I don't think we need them anymore, and we can
link the nightly build directly to the "published distribution" from
the snapshot repository [1].
How about we leave the existent 2.x build as a full top down build,
with tests and only deploy if the build/tests are successful. In the
meantime, we can explore a partitioned build in parallel, something
like:
tuscany-2.x-runtime (modules, features, and some more stuff)
tuscany-itests
tuscany-compliance-test
...
deploy
Thoughts ?
[1] http://repository.apache.org/snapshots/org/apache/tuscany/sca/tuscany-distribution-all/2.0-SNAPSHOT/
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
I've spent a bit of time on this now and talked to the Hudson build
people, still don't yet have a very perfect approach.
The problems are that the Tuscany build takes ages and so often times
out or it quite often fails due to some transient issue, perhaps the
running so long is making it more susceptible to those transient
issues. As there is just one monolithic build run any problem causes
it all to fail so we don't get the snapshot jars or distributions
published, and also may not get to see anything thats been broken by a
change.
One of the reasons it takes so long is that there is a problem with
Hudson and/or the ASF Hudson set up which makes the archiving between
the Hudson salves and master really slow, eg it can take many hours to
archive the tuscany distributions as they're so big, but even some of
the other big jars can be quite slow too.
There is a way to disable the archiving which makes it a lot faster
but then it doesn't keep the last successful build (which we use for
the nightly distro downloads on the website) or publish the snapshots
after a successful build. With the Hudson archiving disabled the build
could do a deploy during the build run (ie mvn deploy instead of mvn
install) but then if there is a failure somewhere it could be
deploying something incomplete or broken.
It seems like there should be some way to get it working better by
splitting it up into multiple Hudson jobs which depend on each other,
but i haven't yet found an approach that works very well or isn't
really complicated or slow. I'll keep playing around but if anyone
else has any suggestions then please do chime in.
...ant
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 7:50 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:20 AM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: antelder
>> Date: Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>> New Revision: 1039071
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1039071&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Add a build profile to build all thats necessary for the all distro as quickly as possible, so no tests get run, intended mainly for Hudson to try to get some nightly builds published more often
>>
>> Modified:
>> tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>>
>> Modified: tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1039071&r1=1039070&r2=1039071&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml (original)
>> +++ tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>> @@ -669,6 +669,23 @@ org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly:org.apac
>> </profile>
>>
>> <profile>
>> + <id>all-distro</id>
>> + <properties>
>> + <skipTests>true</skipTests>
>> + <buildZips>true</buildZips>
>> + </properties>
>> + <modules>
>> + <module>maven/maven-tuscany-plugin</module>
>> + <module>modules</module>
>> + <module>features</module>
>> + <module>distribution/all</module>
>> + </modules>
>> + <build>
>> + <defaultGoal>install</defaultGoal>
>> + </build>
>> + </profile>
>> +
>> + <profile>
>> <id>base</id>
>> <modules>
>> <module>modules/assembly</module>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> The 2.x code base has been growing and the time to perform a full
> build has grown as well, and I know some of us are relying on Hudson
> to perform a full build with all tests to make sure the code is stable
> and no regressions have been introduced.
>
> From the comments on this commit, it seems that we are going to start
> skipping tests in Hudson builds. I don't think it's a good idea to
> start building AND publishing snapshots of modules that are not even
> tested.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
Luciano, the Hudson builds aren't very successful and most of the time
they don't complete. When i say "most" of the time i mean that without
manual intervention we can go for months without getting a Hudson
build through. Often the fails are not due to any problem in the
Tuscany code but some unrelated Hudson problem such as timeouts or
port conflicts. Most Tuscany devs don't seem to have time to do
anything when Hudson fails so I'm a little skeptical people are
relying much on the results.
I've spent way too much time on this now with its current setup so
I've started looking at different approaches, and one of those is
trying splitting things up so the testing runs separately. I'd like to
get the nightly build section at
http://tuscany.apache.org/sca-java-releases.html being more reliable
and perhaps with a separate status line showing things like the status
of the different sets of things like itests, compliance tests, module
builds etc.
...ant
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by ant elder <an...@gmail.com>.
On Fri, Nov 26, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:20 AM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>>> Author: antelder
>>> Date: Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>>> New Revision: 1039071
>>>
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1039071&view=rev
>>> Log:
>>> Add a build profile to build all thats necessary for the all distro as quickly as possible, so no tests get run, intended mainly for Hudson to try to get some nightly builds published more often
>>>
>>> Modified:
>>> tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>>>
>>> Modified: tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1039071&r1=1039070&r2=1039071&view=diff
>>> ==============================================================================
>>> --- tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml (original)
>>> +++ tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>>> @@ -669,6 +669,23 @@ org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly:org.apac
>>> </profile>
>>>
>>> <profile>
>>> + <id>all-distro</id>
>>> + <properties>
>>> + <skipTests>true</skipTests>
>>> + <buildZips>true</buildZips>
>>> + </properties>
>>> + <modules>
>>> + <module>maven/maven-tuscany-plugin</module>
>>> + <module>modules</module>
>>> + <module>features</module>
>>> + <module>distribution/all</module>
>>> + </modules>
>>> + <build>
>>> + <defaultGoal>install</defaultGoal>
>>> + </build>
>>> + </profile>
>>> +
>>> + <profile>
>>> <id>base</id>
>>> <modules>
>>> <module>modules/assembly</module>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> The 2.x code base has been growing and the time to perform a full
>> build has grown as well, and I know some of us are relying on Hudson
>> to perform a full build with all tests to make sure the code is stable
>> and no regressions have been introduced.
>>
>> From the comments on this commit, it seems that we are going to start
>> skipping tests in Hudson builds. I don't think it's a good idea to
>> start building AND publishing snapshots of modules that are not even
>> tested.
>>
>> Thoughts ?
>>
>
>
> Just an update:
>
> The Hudson builds are already using this new profile, which gives the
> false impression that the build is successful:
>
Thats not a false impression, the build is successful at the moment,
at least for me locally and Hudson.
...ant
Re: What's the purpose of publishing broken builds ? was Re: svn
commit: r1039071 - /tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
Posted by Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com>.
On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 11:50 PM, Luciano Resende <lu...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 7:20 AM, <an...@apache.org> wrote:
>> Author: antelder
>> Date: Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>> New Revision: 1039071
>>
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc?rev=1039071&view=rev
>> Log:
>> Add a build profile to build all thats necessary for the all distro as quickly as possible, so no tests get run, intended mainly for Hudson to try to get some nightly builds published more often
>>
>> Modified:
>> tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>>
>> Modified: tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml
>> URL: http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml?rev=1039071&r1=1039070&r2=1039071&view=diff
>> ==============================================================================
>> --- tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml (original)
>> +++ tuscany/sca-java-2.x/trunk/pom.xml Thu Nov 25 15:20:38 2010
>> @@ -669,6 +669,23 @@ org.apache.tuscany.sca.assembly:org.apac
>> </profile>
>>
>> <profile>
>> + <id>all-distro</id>
>> + <properties>
>> + <skipTests>true</skipTests>
>> + <buildZips>true</buildZips>
>> + </properties>
>> + <modules>
>> + <module>maven/maven-tuscany-plugin</module>
>> + <module>modules</module>
>> + <module>features</module>
>> + <module>distribution/all</module>
>> + </modules>
>> + <build>
>> + <defaultGoal>install</defaultGoal>
>> + </build>
>> + </profile>
>> +
>> + <profile>
>> <id>base</id>
>> <modules>
>> <module>modules/assembly</module>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> The 2.x code base has been growing and the time to perform a full
> build has grown as well, and I know some of us are relying on Hudson
> to perform a full build with all tests to make sure the code is stable
> and no regressions have been introduced.
>
> From the comments on this commit, it seems that we are going to start
> skipping tests in Hudson builds. I don't think it's a good idea to
> start building AND publishing snapshots of modules that are not even
> tested.
>
> Thoughts ?
>
Just an update:
The Hudson builds are already using this new profile, which gives the
false impression that the build is successful:
https://hudson.apache.org/hudson/job/Tuscany-2x/969/
But when I try to build it locally I see multiple issues, like the one
below in the samples.
WARNING: Unresolved resource
META-INF/services/org.apache.tuscany.sca.provider.ImplementationProviderFactory
found in bundle: 255 org.apache.tuscany.sca.implementation.web.runtime
INSTALLED
Nov 25, 2010 11:38:08 PM
org.apache.tuscany.sca.extensibility.equinox.EquinoxServiceDiscoverer
getServiceDeclarations
SEVERE: Bundle: org.apache.tuscany.sca.implementation.web.runtime -
The bundle could not be resolved. Reason: Missing Constraint:
Import-Package: javax.servlet.jsp; version="0.0.0"
org.osgi.framework.BundleException: The bundle could not be resolved.
Reason: Missing Constraint: Import-Package: javax.servlet.jsp;
version="0.0.0"
--
Luciano Resende
http://people.apache.org/~lresende
http://twitter.com/lresende1975
http://lresende.blogspot.com/