continuum-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Marc Jansen Chua <chuabl...@yahoo.com>
Subject Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to use installations in their config file
Date Tue, 07 Dec 2010 02:47:01 GMT
Hello Deng,

Forgot to mention on the duplicate installation case. I am planning to give more weight on
the installations in build agents because configuring installations in build agents can cater
to customizability in micro-managing build agents compared to build environment installations
which affects all(macro-managing) build agents' installations. So in the case of duplicate
installation between the build agent in a build environment and the build environment the
build agent is in, the build agent's installation will overlap the build environment's installation.

Is there any better way than the implementation that I currently propose??
Thoughts & ideas would count a lot :D

Thanks,
Chuable

--- On Tue, 12/7/10, Deng Ching <oching@apache.org> wrote:

From: Deng Ching <oching@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents to
use installations in their config file
To: dev@continuum.apache.org
Date: Tuesday, December 7, 2010, 10:23 AM

Extending the installation config sounds fine to me, but we need to
make sure that it is clearly documented :)

Btw, how would duplicate installations be handled? For example, if a
JDK installation is defined in the build environment then another JDK
installation is defined in the build agent. I would assume the
installation in the build agent would take precedence over the one in
the build environment?

Thanks,
Deng

On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 1:31 PM, Marc Jansen Chua <chuable82@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Hello Deng,
>
> I am planning to retain the build environment because some other users may be using its
concept of installation configuration. The addition would just be the ability to include installations
from an xml config file of a build agent that is being used in the build process. So the installation
set would be the combination of the installations in the build environment together with the
installations from each of the build agents utilized in the build process. The idea of my
implementation of the improvement would just be considered as an extending of the installation
configuration rather than a major overhaul of the build agent's installation configuration
process.
>
> The reason for this improvement is that currently, I am trying to manipulate individual
installations from each build agent, as I have observerd in continuum, build agents only use
the installations from their build environments during build.
>
> - Chuable
>
> --- On Mon, 12/6/10, Deng Ching <oching@apache.org> wrote:
>
> From: Deng Ching <oching@apache.org>
> Subject: Re: Implementation proposal for Continuum Issue #2592 Ability for build agents
to use installations in their config file
> To: dev@continuum.apache.org
> Date: Monday, December 6, 2010, 11:03 AM
>
> Hi Chuable,
>
> How would this affect the current behavior of Continuum? Currently, a
> build agent uses the installations set in the build environment where
> the build agent group (that a build agent belongs to) is attached. How
> would this change when CONTINUUM-2592 is implemented? Would build
> environments still be necessary for distributed builds?
>
> Thanks,
> Deng
>
> On Mon, Dec 6, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Marc Jansen Chua <chuable82@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Took a while for me to trace the
>> installation usage of build agents during the build process, it was
>> encapsulated in so many layers.
>>
>>
>> Implementation proposal:
>>
>> There's a method to trigger the build and a method to select which
>> agent to use, the methods are pretty much overloaded, so from those
>> methods, I'll improve them to include the installations from  the build
>> agent's xml config file, I'll re-use the getter method that is used in
>> displaying the individual set of installations per build agents.
>>
>>
>> I'm still currently mapping out the whole encapsulated layer to see
>> which layer is to be added with the enhancement to cater to
>> extensibility & scalability. Will follow up on what exact classes to add the
improvement
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -CHUABLE
>>
>>
>>
>
>
>
>



      
Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message