Skip to content
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

support entering repository information which are not in rosdistro #38

Closed
dirk-thomas opened this issue Mar 16, 2017 · 3 comments
Closed

Comments

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member

This would allow users to generate the prerelease command line for repositories which are not listed in the rosdistro yet. Currently they first need to add the repo with at least a source entry, wait for that to be merged, run the prerelease, and then do a bloom release. While they are iterating locally they are potentially already getting notification emails for the devel jobs from the farm (if not disabled explicitly. So this feature would drastically improve the workflow for users imo.

For each "external" repo the user has to provide:

  • the repo name
  • the scm type
  • the repo url
  • the version (branch / tag / hash)

The repository information is passed using the --custom-repo argument describe in https://github.com/ros-infrastructure/ros_buildfarm/blob/master/doc/jobs/prerelease_jobs.rst#run-for-custom-repositories

This would also "solve" #14 since this feature would be a superset of what is requested there.

@wjwwood
Copy link
Contributor

wjwwood commented Mar 16, 2017

That sounds useful to me. It would also imply finally fixing #31. I don't have any spare cycles to do either right now. Maybe if I finish with my Lunar releases relatively quickly I can use some of my ROS 1 time for it.

@dirk-thomas
Copy link
Member Author

Once this has been implemented the second part of this recent wiki should be reverted and the option to specify external repos should be mentioned explicitly.

@130s
Copy link
Contributor

130s commented Mar 24, 2017

the second part of this recent wiki should be reverted

Yeah, I noticed that my change wasn't accurate. I'll revert the "second" part.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants