Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input #6874

divyanshiGupta · 2020-10-08T16:30:07Z

Story: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-3779

This PR adds the functionality to create pipeline or buildConfig based on user input. If add-pipeline is selected then build configuration advanced option will not be shown.
Also if a user adds a pipeline during app creation then on submit the pipeline will now start automatically (pipelineRun gets created on submit) using the created resources.
Builds section will not be shown in the sidebar if buildConfig is not present and the app was created using import flows. The latter check is added to make sure that if D/DC was created using CLI/import from yaml then we show the builds section at all times to let the user know that they havent added a buildConfig. Also showing waiting for build alert similar to what is shown in case of buildConfig.
Show pipeline not started icon in build-decorator when pipeline didnt get started on submit.
Refactored the edit application utilities to get the git and docker specific values from associated pipeline so that the edit flow doesn't break. Also getting the buildStrategy (source/docker) from the associated pipeline since now there can either be a buildConfig or pipeline.

Gif:

Unit test coverage:

andrewballantyne · 2020-10-09T17:00:53Z

divyanshiGupta · 2020-10-14T11:23:07Z

@karthikjeeyar we will also need another story for adding the functionality to edit pipeline using the edit app flow because as I mentioned above previously edit flow used to get git data from buildConfig and if the git data was changed then the new values were added to the buildConfig and it was updated but since now if a pipeline is added there will be no buildConfig and thus I am getting git data from the pipeline for the edit flow but as we do not have the functionality for editing/updating the pipeline the changed data is not propagated back to the pipeline. cc: @serenamarie125

karthikjeeyar · 2020-10-15T15:59:26Z

@divyanshiGupta When you say git data, is it the url and branch name? If Yes, can we use the Deployemnt/DeploymentConfig/KSVC resource's metadata annotations like app.openshift.io/vcs-ref (branch Name) , app.openshift.io/vcs-uri (URL) to pull the data. WDYT?

divyanshiGupta · 2020-10-16T12:15:27Z

@divyanshiGupta When you say git data, is it the url and branch name? If Yes, can we use the Deployemnt/DeploymentConfig/KSVC resource's metadata annotations like app.openshift.io/vcs-ref (branch Name) , app.openshift.io/vcs-uri (URL) to pull the data. WDYT?

@karthikjeeyar it's not about from where to get the data but if that data is changed it should be propagated to all the resources that use that data in someway. For example the associated pipeline has a git URL param and we can get that data from this param but if git URL changes we need the functionality to update the git URL param of the pipeline thereby updating the pipeline. Currently we don't have the functionality to update the pipeline using edit flows since we were using buildConfig to build the image but now since we are also using pipeline to the build the image we need to have this functionality. It's not just about updating the git params but also we need to decide upon if we want to show the pipeline section and stuff like that and that's where UX input is needed.

frontend/public/components/overview/build-overview.tsx

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/import/pipeline/pipeline-template-utils.ts

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/edit-application/EditApplicationPage.tsx

...ackages/dev-console/src/components/edit-application/__tests__/edit-application-utils.spec.ts

karthikjeeyar · 2020-10-19T08:24:37Z

@divyanshiGupta I have created a story ODC-5018 to capture the improvements around the edit flows, you have mentioned above.

karthikjeeyar · 2020-10-19T14:32:31Z

Verified locally, works as expected
/lgtm

karthikjeeyar · 2020-10-19T14:33:15Z

/retest

karthikjeeyar · 2020-10-19T14:33:27Z

/kind feature

frontend/public/components/overview/pods-overview.tsx

frontend/public/components/overview/build-overview.tsx

frontend/public/components/overview/resource-overview-page.tsx

bgliwa01

lgtm

andrewballantyne

Few nits and a change I am unsure I understand. Looks like you were removing support for resources but then added support for resources elsewhere.

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/import/advanced/AdvancedSection.tsx

andrewballantyne · 2020-10-28T18:40:59Z

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/import/pipeline/pipeline-template-utils.ts

+      case 'DOCKERFILE':
+        return { ...param, default: dockerfilePath };


+1, good catch. This should have been added by the other work. I forgot about the dockerfile flow Pipeline section 🤦

@jerolimov I think we may want to look at back-porting this to piggyback on the work you did for the other params.

cc @karthikjeeyar

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/import/pipeline/pipeline-template-utils.ts

andrewballantyne · 2020-10-28T19:03:30Z

frontend/packages/console-shared/src/components/status/Status.tsx

@@ -92,6 +93,9 @@ export const Status: React.FC<StatusProps> = ({
    case 'Unknown':
      return <StatusIconAndText {...statusProps} icon={<UnknownIcon />} />;

+    case 'PipelineNotStarted':
+      return <StatusIconAndText {...statusProps} icon={<OutlinedHourglassIcon />} />;


Created a Story to update this icon now they have it figured out. https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-5047

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/utils/pipeline-utils.ts

andrewballantyne · 2020-10-28T19:30:44Z

frontend/packages/dev-console/src/components/import/import-submit-utils.ts

+    );
+  } else if (pipeline.template && !dryRun) {
+    const newPipeline = await createPipelineForImportFlow(formData);
+    requests.push(createPipelineRunForImportFlow(formData, newPipeline));


Also, if this fails (which I don't think is possible today) we'll need to not cancel the submit flow. I've created another story (https://issues.redhat.com/browse/ODC-5048) to chase this down as it may require hacking up the resource in order to test it. No sense in holding up this PR for potentially a non-starter flow.

andrewballantyne

/lgtm
/assign @rohitkrai03 @christianvogt

rohitkrai03

/approve

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-11-03T19:21:05Z

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andrewballantyne, bgliwa01, divyanshiGupta, karthikjeeyar, rohitkrai03

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

~~frontend/OWNERS~~ [rohitkrai03]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

openshift-merge-robot · 2020-11-03T21:50:07Z

@divyanshiGupta: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-gcp-console	`e2db668`	link	`/test e2e-gcp-console`

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

openshift-bot · 2020-11-03T21:52:30Z

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

openshift-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. component/core Related to console core functionality labels Oct 8, 2020

openshift-ci-robot requested review from dtaylor113 and invincibleJai October 8, 2020 16:30

openshift-ci-robot added component/dev-console Related to dev-console component/shared Related to console-shared labels Oct 8, 2020

openshift-ci-robot requested review from andrewballantyne and karthikjeeyar October 9, 2020 17:00

divyanshiGupta changed the title ~~[WIP]Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input~~ Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input Oct 12, 2020

openshift-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Oct 12, 2020

divyanshiGupta force-pushed the ODC-3779 branch from 79c34a8 to 1a29e2e Compare October 14, 2020 11:14

karthikjeeyar reviewed Oct 19, 2020

View reviewed changes

divyanshiGupta force-pushed the ODC-3779 branch 2 times, most recently from 82a1d4d to c56c357 Compare October 19, 2020 11:27

openshift-ci-robot assigned karthikjeeyar Oct 19, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 19, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added the kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. label Oct 19, 2020

christianvogt reviewed Oct 21, 2020

View reviewed changes

frontend/public/components/overview/pods-overview.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

frontend/public/components/overview/build-overview.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

frontend/public/components/overview/resource-overview-page.tsx Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

divyanshiGupta force-pushed the ODC-3779 branch from c56c357 to ed18834 Compare October 22, 2020 17:08

openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 22, 2020

divyanshiGupta force-pushed the ODC-3779 branch from ed18834 to 9b127cd Compare October 22, 2020 17:14

bgliwa01 approved these changes Oct 22, 2020

View reviewed changes

andrewballantyne suggested changes Oct 28, 2020

View reviewed changes

andrewballantyne reviewed Oct 28, 2020

View reviewed changes

divyanshiGupta added 5 commits October 29, 2020 21:16

Create and start pipeline on submit if added

2ad605c

Add util for pipelineRun creation on submit

8da59d7

Do not show builds section if buildConfig not present

409184d

Show pipeline not started in build decorator

bcab740

Get git and docker specific values from pipeline

7eb90b1

divyanshiGupta force-pushed the ODC-3779 branch from 9b127cd to e2db668 Compare October 29, 2020 16:32

Add and fix unit tests

e2db668

divyanshiGupta requested a review from andrewballantyne October 29, 2020 17:15

andrewballantyne approved these changes Oct 30, 2020

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci-robot assigned christianvogt, rohitkrai03 and andrewballantyne Oct 30, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Oct 30, 2020

rohitkrai03 approved these changes Nov 3, 2020

View reviewed changes

openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 3, 2020

openshift-merge-robot merged commit 5a69792 into openshift:master Nov 3, 2020

spadgett added this to the v4.7 milestone Nov 4, 2020

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input #6874

Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input #6874

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 8, 2020 •

edited

andrewballantyne commented Oct 9, 2020

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 14, 2020 •

edited

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 15, 2020

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 16, 2020 •

edited

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

bgliwa01 left a comment

andrewballantyne left a comment

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

andrewballantyne left a comment

rohitkrai03 left a comment

openshift-ci-robot commented Nov 3, 2020

openshift-merge-robot commented Nov 3, 2020

openshift-bot commented Nov 3, 2020

		case 'DOCKERFILE':
		return { ...param, default: dockerfilePath };

Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input #6874

Create buildConfig or pipeline based on user input #6874

Conversation

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 8, 2020 • edited

andrewballantyne commented Oct 9, 2020

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 14, 2020 • edited

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 15, 2020

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 16, 2020 • edited

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

karthikjeeyar commented Oct 19, 2020

bgliwa01 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne Oct 28, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

andrewballantyne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

rohitkrai03 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

openshift-ci-robot commented Nov 3, 2020

openshift-merge-robot commented Nov 3, 2020

openshift-bot commented Nov 3, 2020

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 8, 2020 •

edited

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 14, 2020 •

edited

divyanshiGupta commented Oct 16, 2020 •

edited