Feature #10118

Write library code that maps Jenkins jobs from building to testing

Added by bertagaz 2015-08-28 09:36:03 . Updated 2015-10-13 23:56:11 .

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Elevated
Assignee:
Category:
Continuous Integration
Target version:
Tails_1.7
Start date:
2015-08-28
Due date:
% Done:

100%

Feature Branch:
Type of work:
Code
Blueprint:

Starter:
0
Affected tool:
Deliverable for:
267

Description

Generating the test jobs will probably require to write some more code in our pythonlib, at least to plug Jenkins to Redmine and get the branch ticket status, as stated in the blueprint

Subtasks

Related issues

Blocked by Tails - Feature #10117: Design how to run our test suite in Jenkins Resolved 2015-08-28
Blocks Tails - Feature #10119: Adapt the job generation script to also output corresponding test jobs Resolved 2015-08-28

History

#1 Updated by bertagaz 2015-08-28 09:36:28

#2 Updated by bertagaz 2015-08-28 09:36:45

  • blocked by Feature #10117: Design how to run our test suite in Jenkins added

#3 Updated by bertagaz 2015-08-28 09:39:52

  • blocks Feature #10119: Adapt the job generation script to also output corresponding test jobs added

#4 Updated by bertagaz 2015-09-01 03:28:21

Regarding your comment in del>Feature #9597#note-33:

> >> I don’t know what the directorie structure under $jobdir/builds/ is (the info you provided earlier on this ticket doesn’t match the code I am reviewing), so just to be sure: the updated clean_old_jenkins_artifacts won’t leave empty directories (e.g. archive, or perhaps even archive/.. etc.) behind itself, will it?
>
> > The info is in jenkins.lizard:/var/lib/jenkins. The archive directory will remain with some tiny files in there, but will be removed by Jenkins with its own artifacts cleanup method, that is a bit too lame for us sadly.
>
> OK, thanks, sounds good enough to me. So there must be a plan to turn on Jenkins’ own artifacts cleanup method. I think it should be made clear on Feature #10118. I’m curious how we’ll do that in a way that doesn’t interfere with our own artifacts cleanup (I guess that we’ll need to configure Jenkins’ own cleanup to only trigger for stuff that’s older than anything we want to keep, which sounds acceptable); if there’s anything more to say about it, let’s discuss it on Feature #10118.

Jenkins is already configured to remove artifacts older than the last 50 builds. So I don’t think it won’t interfere with our script.

#5 Updated by intrigeri 2015-09-01 04:36:13

> Jenkins is already configured to remove artifacts older than the last 50 builds. So I don’t think it won’t interfere with our script.

My understanding is that it’s rather for “jobs that are more than 50 days old”, which is more what we want (there can be N jobs a day). Perfect. Thanks!

#6 Updated by intrigeri 2015-09-16 14:13:56

  • blocks #8668 added

#7 Updated by bertagaz 2015-09-22 15:18:19

  • Target version changed from Tails_1.6 to Tails_1.7

#8 Updated by sajolida 2015-10-01 07:26:17

  • Priority changed from Normal to Elevated

Note that this is due on October 15 which is actually before Tails 1.7. Raising priority accordingly.

#9 Updated by bertagaz 2015-10-12 02:24:06

  • Assignee changed from bertagaz to intrigeri
  • % Done changed from 0 to 50
  • QA Check changed from Dev Needed to Ready for QA

So most of the work related to this ticket has been done with Feature #10119. If you’re happy with the path choosen in this other ticket, I guess this one can follow it’s state and be closed with it (or not).

#10 Updated by intrigeri 2015-10-13 23:55:49

  • Status changed from Confirmed to Resolved

> So most of the work related to this ticket has been done with Feature #10119. If you’re happy with the path choosen in this other ticket, I guess this one can follow it’s state and be closed with it (or not).

Yes, let’s track that on Feature #10119 only from now on.

#11 Updated by intrigeri 2015-10-13 23:56:11

  • Assignee deleted (intrigeri)
  • % Done changed from 50 to 100
  • QA Check changed from Ready for QA to Pass