continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Christian Edward Gruber <cgru...@israfil.net>
Subject Re: Associating projects with distributed build agents
Date Mon, 19 Jan 2009 22:43:11 GMT
I think the "magic" can be made visible, in that if it is criteria  
based, the server can display those agents which would apply to the  
current criteria, so that a user can see the implications of his  
selection.  Since the display will be the same logic as the criteria  
selection (it's really just straight set theory) then the user is not  
going to be surprised.

Christian

On 19-Jan-09, at 02:44 , Brett Porter wrote:

> +1
>
> I think selection needs to be a combination of capability,  
> permission and availability. I would mostly prefer the user is in  
> full control of selecting these rather than having too much magic  
> (automated selection might be a nice feature, but the basic starting  
> point should be a fully configured system).
>
> - Brett
>
> On 17/01/2009, at 1:36 PM, Christian Edward Gruber wrote:
>
>> I guess then having agent groups as a logical group, but make group  
>> be part of the criteria would help with that then, group  
>> effectively being a property of the agent.
>>
>> The key for me is to have the whole thing specified as constraints,  
>> not explicit solutions, so that new agents can be launched and they  
>> will automatically fit into the constraints based on their  
>> configuration, rather than having to add them to this or that build  
>> definition.  Filter/constraint configuration is a great way to  
>> simplify config, especially with large banks of agents.
>>
>> Christian
>>
>> On 17-Jan-09, at 16:22 , Wendy Smoak wrote:
>>
>>> I can see that working, if I can define arbitrary criteria like a
>>> property name/value.
>>>
>>> I need a way to make sure that Top Secret Project X builds on agents
>>> 3, 5 and 14 only, and that no other projects ever build on those
>>> agents.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> Wendy
>>>
>>> On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Christian Edward Gruber
>>> <cgruber@israfil.net> wrote:
>>>> Rather than agent groups, could we go with a criteria approach?   
>>>> That is to
>>>> say, you can describe and agent's capabilities, then associate  
>>>> criteria for
>>>> a project group or project, and then let the system sort out  
>>>> which agents
>>>> can fulfill which criteria?
>>>
>>
>> Christian E. Gruber - President / Senior Consultant                
>> email:  cgruber@israfil.net
>> Isráfíl Consulting Services Corporation                            
>> mobile: +1 (289) 221-9839
>> "Keenness of understanding is due to keenness of vision..."        
>> phone:  +1 (905) 640-1119
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Brett Porter
> brett@apache.org
> http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
>

Christian E. Gruber - President / Senior Consultant                
email:  cgruber@israfil.net
Isráfíl Consulting Services Corporation                            
mobile: +1 (289) 221-9839
"Keenness of understanding is due to keenness of vision..."        
phone:  +1 (905) 640-1119






Mime
View raw message