New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Replace slow gerrit-rpm-packaging implementation with a better one #1288
Conversation
35bd44d
to
035215d
Compare
- openstack-upstream-gerrit-rpm-packaging-Master | ||
- openstack-upstream-gerrit-rpm-packaging-Mitaka | ||
- openstack-upstream-gerrit-rpm-packaging-Newton | ||
- openstack-rpm-packaging-sles12-Master |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think we currently use sles12sp1, no?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, I didn't want to expose the sp level, since that is an implementation detail (same reason it is called -centos7 not -centos7.3).
tar xf ${{lcrelease}}.tar.gz | ||
gitcheckout=rpm-packaging-stable-${{lcrelease}} | ||
else | ||
rm -rf rpm-packaging-stable-${{lcrelease}} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
looks wrong to remove stable while working with master
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
done
templ = """ | ||
<project name="%(project)s"> | ||
<title>Autogenerated CI project</title> | ||
<description></description> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Not sure if that info is available but it would be nice to backlink to the review.openstack.org review in the description. But not a must, just want to mention it here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yep, I had that problem as well. it is on todo for a later point in time when I have a spare minute.
|
||
repository = """ | ||
<repository name="SLE_12_SP1" rebuild="local" block="local" %(linkedbuild)s> | ||
<path project="Cloud:OpenStack:Upstream:Master" repository="SLE_12_SP1"/> |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks wrong to always use "Cloud:OpenStack:Upstream:Master". What about Newton and Mitaka?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
whopsie, that is outdated. updated with the current version
70d124f
to
71abbaf
Compare
import glob | ||
import os | ||
import platform | ||
import pymod2pkg |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
flake8 via travis complains about missing newlines and wrong ordering here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
and it is wrong on that..
71abbaf
to
4632a48
Compare
4632a48
to
36c267e
Compare
print('Updating meta for ', project) | ||
meta.close() | ||
|
||
sh.osc('api', '-T', meta.name, '/source/%s/_meta' % project) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMHO you can use a variant of https://github.com/openSUSE/osc-plugin-factory/blob/master/osclib/stagingapi.py#L527
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As we hit a build service DoS protection on the number of source links, the old method did not work anymore. Replace with a project-link based solution that only rebuilds affected packages (and their dependencies)
36c267e
to
7c50dc8
Compare
As we hit a build service DoS protection on the number of source links,
the old method did not work anymore. Replace with a project-link based
solution that only rebuilds affected packages (and their dependencies)