Providing feedback on the booting process to users #203

rtyler · 2018-08-27T22:08:18Z

There's still some more work I need to do here to build a little status app inside evergreen-client

jenkinsadmin · 2018-08-27T22:35:38Z

Build failed; the context from the latest run is:

Expand to view

Post stage
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] �[3A�[2K
Stopping distribution_instance_1 ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[3B�[2A�[2K
Stopping distribution_backend_1  ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[2B�[1A�[2K
Stopping distribution_db_1       ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[1BRemoving distribution_instance_1 ... 
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Removing distribution_backend_1  ... 
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Removing distribution_db_1       ... 
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] �[1A�[2K
Removing distribution_db_1       ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[1B�[3A�[2K
Removing distribution_instance_1 ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[3B�[2A�[2K
Removing distribution_backend_1  ... �[32mdone�[0m
�[2BRemoving network distribution_default
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] G'day!
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] 
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Ran 6 tests.
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] 
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] FAILED (failures=2)
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Makefile:44: recipe for target 'aws-cloud-container-check' failed
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] make: *** [aws-cloud-container-check] Error 1
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] make: Leaving directory '/home/jenkins/workspace/Infra_evergreen_PR-203-LVWRSS6XSF2GMZTKQVYYLOI7GSVE6J775JF3DWSEYOD3FNOJPM5A/distribution'
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] archiveArtifacts
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Archiving artifacts
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] // withEnv
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] // node
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] // stage
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Failed in branch AWS Cloud image (smokes)
[Pipeline] // parallel
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // withEnv
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // stage
[Pipeline] stage
[Pipeline] { (Publish jenkins/evergreen)
Stage "Publish jenkins/evergreen" skipped due to earlier failure(s)
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // stage
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // timestamps
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // timeout
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // withEnv
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // withEnv
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // node
[Pipeline] End of Pipeline

GitHub has been notified of this commit’s build result

ERROR: script returned exit code 2
Finished: FAILURE

Powered by the Comment Logger

batmat

Wow, much nice! Very demo effect!

batmat · 2018-08-28T10:19:22Z

distribution/www/502.html

+                <div class="centered">
+                    <img src="evergreen-static/demon_256.png"
+                            title="Jenkins Evergreen Error!"
+                            alt="Jenkins Evergreen isn't too magical!"/>


batmat · 2018-08-28T10:21:00Z

distribution/www/521.html

+                <div>
+                    <p>
+                        Jenkins Evergreen is an automatically updating rolling
+                        distribution system for Jenkins It consists of


NIT: Missing period

batmat · 2018-08-28T10:22:46Z

distribution/Dockerfile

@@ -57,11 +58,22 @@ RUN apk add --no-cache git \
                        ttf-dejavu \
                        curl \
                        socat \
-                        wget
+                        wget \
+                        nginx


Not a specific issue, so I think that's fine. But we'll need to consider how we want users to get updates for system wide installed components such as this. (Issue already existing for docker too, for instance).

batmat · 2018-08-28T10:24:28Z

distribution/Dockerfile

@@ -1,4 +1,4 @@
-FROM node:9-alpine
+FROM node:10-alpine


AIUI, from an upgrade experience perspective, we'll want users to periodically do a manual switch by pulling the latest image, and re-running a new container (while keeping the volume). If they do not, they won't get this kind of update, not sure we have an easy way out here. (well, I'm sure the way out is not easy, phrased differently 😈).

Exactly, I've thought about this kind of thing a lot over the past couple weeks. Part of the motivation to get this user feedback system is to allow us to inform the users a new container being present (hopefully)

…e Jenkins boots

This will help the nginx frontend display the right page when Jenkins Evergreen is getting started

…er socket.io This is a bit of a pain to integration test, since we really need to rebuild the whole container between round-trips Related to JENKINS-53227

jenkinsadmin · 2018-08-29T17:53:43Z

Build failed; the context from the latest run is:

Expand to view

[Pipeline] parallel
[Pipeline] [Base image] { (Branch: Base image)
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] { (Branch: Docker Cloud image)
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] { (Branch: AWS Cloud image (smokes))
[Pipeline] [Base image] stage
[Pipeline] [Base image] { (Base image)
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] stage
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] { (Docker Cloud image)
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] stage
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] { (AWS Cloud image (smokes))
Stage "Base image" skipped due to earlier failure(s)
Stage "Docker Cloud image" skipped due to earlier failure(s)
Stage "AWS Cloud image (smokes)" skipped due to earlier failure(s)
[Pipeline] [Base image] }
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] }
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[Pipeline] [Base image] // stage
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] // stage
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] // stage
[Pipeline] [Base image] }
[Base image] Failed in branch Base image
[Pipeline] [Docker Cloud image] }
[Docker Cloud image] Failed in branch Docker Cloud image
[Pipeline] [AWS Cloud image (smokes)] }
[AWS Cloud image (smokes)] Failed in branch AWS Cloud image (smokes)
[Pipeline] // parallel
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // stage
[Pipeline] stage
[Pipeline] { (Publish jenkins/evergreen)
Stage "Publish jenkins/evergreen" skipped due to earlier failure(s)
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // stage
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // timestamps
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // timeout
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // withEnv
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // withEnv
[Pipeline] }
[Pipeline] // node
[Pipeline] End of Pipeline

GitHub has been notified of this commit’s build result

ERROR: script returned exit code 2
Finished: FAILURE

Powered by the Comment Logger

This simplifies development a bit and makes it easier to view the status page straight from a client's `make run`

This has been tested in a container and outside of one

batmat · 2018-08-30T08:29:35Z

README.adoc

@@ -45,7 +45,7 @@ docker volume create jenkins-evergreen-data && \
 docker run --name evergreen \
    --restart=always \
    -ti \
-    -p 8080:8080 \
+    -p 8080:80 \


Interesting issue I just hit because of this: this docs got updated immediately, when for some reason, the public Docker image seems to be still not updated for some reason. So Running the docs as is was binding 8080 to 80, but my local image does not have nginx yet. (yes, I did a docker pull in case)

FTR, the updated image has been updated now.

rtyler added the work-in-progress Not quite ready for review label Aug 27, 2018

rtyler force-pushed the integrity-checks-53227 branch from 530a07d to fa90740 Compare August 28, 2018 00:50

batmat approved these changes Aug 28, 2018

View reviewed changes

rtyler force-pushed the integrity-checks-53227 branch from fa90740 to d9199f4 Compare August 29, 2018 00:04

R. Tyler Croy added 5 commits August 29, 2018 07:16

Incorporate nginx into our container to provide a user interface whil…

7358a77

…e Jenkins boots

Update the client to set the booting flag

c6b6aca

This will help the nginx frontend display the right page when Jenkins Evergreen is getting started

add some Evergreen client-side UI machinery

5472b7c

Refactor some common node GNu/Make tooling up into the root directory

d9a860b

Incorporate some tooling into evergreen-client to publish messages ov…

02eceb9

…er socket.io This is a bit of a pain to integration test, since we really need to rebuild the whole container between round-trips Related to JENKINS-53227

rtyler force-pushed the integrity-checks-53227 branch from d9199f4 to efeb561 Compare August 29, 2018 17:48

rtyler removed the work-in-progress Not quite ready for review label Aug 29, 2018

R. Tyler Croy added 3 commits August 29, 2018 10:55

Move the ui code over into the client, and just let the client serve it

19bc6ef

This simplifies development a bit and makes it easier to view the status page straight from a client's `make run`

Add scaffolding for simple built-in documentation

ccdb838

Minor updates to ensure that the loading page is available immediately

3f125f4

This has been tested in a container and outside of one

rtyler force-pushed the integrity-checks-53227 branch from efeb561 to 3f125f4 Compare August 29, 2018 17:56

Update the README to include the new port mapping

c184d5d

rtyler merged commit 3f5e049 into jenkins-infra:master Aug 29, 2018

rtyler deleted the integrity-checks-53227 branch August 29, 2018 20:32

batmat reviewed Aug 30, 2018

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Providing feedback on the booting process to users #203

Providing feedback on the booting process to users #203

rtyler commented Aug 27, 2018

jenkinsadmin commented Aug 27, 2018

batmat left a comment

batmat Aug 28, 2018

batmat Aug 28, 2018

batmat Aug 28, 2018

batmat Aug 28, 2018

rtyler Aug 28, 2018

jenkinsadmin commented Aug 29, 2018

batmat Aug 30, 2018

batmat Aug 30, 2018

Providing feedback on the booting process to users #203

Providing feedback on the booting process to users #203

Conversation

rtyler commented Aug 27, 2018

jenkinsadmin commented Aug 27, 2018

batmat left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batmat Aug 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batmat Aug 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batmat Aug 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batmat Aug 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rtyler Aug 28, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jenkinsadmin commented Aug 29, 2018

batmat Aug 30, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

batmat Aug 30, 2018

Choose a reason for hiding this comment