Mailing-List: contact dev-help@struts.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>
Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: local policy includes SPF record at
 spf.trusted-forwarder.org)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v750)
In-Reply-To: <1F13578C-B73C-4124-98EF-55D3088F7908@apache.org>
References: <1E2F7AB4-7AC3-48B4-89BC-E3474E60F341@apache.org>
 <16d6c6200606200945u54146859o965ebdce8ddd2d66@mail.gmail.com>
 <1F13578C-B73C-4124-98EF-55D3088F7908@apache.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <D14CBAF2-D309-4720-8E63-343BDA3F72A9@apache.org>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: James Mitchell <jmitchell@apache.org>
Subject: Re: Location for nightly builds
Date: Thu, 22 Jun 2006 01:33:16 -0400
To: "Struts Developers List" <dev@struts.apache.org>

I need clarification from a few more people please.

Craig?  Ted?  Niall?  Joe?  Others?

--
James Mitchell


On Jun 21, 2006, at 3:27 PM, James Mitchell wrote:

> On Jun 20, 2006, at 12:45 PM, Martin Cooper wrote:
>
>> On 6/20/06, James Mitchell <jmitchell@apache.org> wrote:
>>>
>>> Craig and I were discussing a few offline items and one thing that
>>> came up was how we currently publish the nightlies.  We agree that
>>> this is best discussed in public, so here I am :)
>>>
>>> Currently the nightly build can be found (or will be) on minotaur
>>> (people.apache.org) under /builds/struts.  For years the builds were
>>> done on Craig's personal machine, which would be scp'd up to  
>>> minotaur
>>> and everything moved happily along for a while.  Then, as the svn
>>> reorg occurred and we sort-of began moving to a Maven 1 based build,
>>> I was using my personal machine to build and upload the maven-built
>>> artifacts to the same place.
>>>
>>> The only problem with the "using a personal machine" approach is  
>>> that
>>> if some dependency changed (with the Ant based build), then, due to
>>> the way our build files worked, Craig had to make the manual change
>>> on his personal machine.  However, with Maven (1 and 2), everything
>>> is declarative in the pom.xml, and so unless there's some weird bug
>>> in a current plugin or if the POM now needs a later plugin version,
>>> there really isn't a need to touch the machine or the local
>>> configuration.
>>>
>>> Later, I moved this process off my personal machine and used my
>>> account on the zone to build and scp over to minotaur the same way.
>>> This was an improvement in reliability, but we still have the  
>>> problem
>>> that this was *my* account and not just anyone could fix it if there
>>> was a problem.
>>>
>>> Looking back ... in and of itself, the actual location of the build
>>> is insignificant with regard to authenticity or security.  Anyone
>>> with an Apache account can upload anything they like to (almost)
>>> wherever they like.  And so long as the build requirements or
>>> dependencies didn't change, everything went along like clockwork.
>>>
>>> Fast forward to June 2006, here we are with more or less 4 Maven 2
>>> based projects, each with multiple artifacts.
>>>
>>> I see our options as:
>>>
>>> Build using:
>>> 1) personal machine
>>> 2) zone (personal account)
>>> 3) zone (shared account, i.e. mrstruts)
>>>
>>> Users download from:
>>> a) minotaur
>>> b) zone
>>>
>>> Currently we are a mixture of 1a and 3a.  Also, 3b isn't really a
>>> viable option because someone would have to use their private key  
>>> for
>>> that shared account (so the scp process would work).
>>
>>
>> You mean 3a isn't viable, right? 3b wouldn't require scp at all,  
>> would it?
>>
>
> Wow, I guess it was later than I thought.  Yes, I meant to say we  
> are currently using a mixture of 1a and 2a.  And that 3a isn't  
> really a viable option.
>
> If b is used/allowed, then it makes the most sense to go with 3b,  
> so everyone can help with fixes and updates.
>
>> Furthermore, I had always assumed that hosting nightlies from the
>>> zone was out of the question.  Is that not the case?
>>
>>
>> I don't know. I think it would be worth a ping to infra, since I  
>> would think
>> this would be the best option.
>
> I'll wait to see how everyone else feels before moving further on  
> this.  I am assuming that no news means everyone agrees and has no  
> problems with the current path.
>
>>
>> Either way, I can see one other approach.  3a with the ability of a
>>> few people to su to root, then su to the personal account (e.g.
>>> jmitchell) and fix whatever.
>>
>>
>> I suppose, although this would mean we'd have to hand out root  
>> more than I'd
>> like.
>>
>> There's also a discussion going on in various places about a  
>> machine named
>> vmbuild, which is intended as a build machine for all (?) projects. I
>> haven't been paying close attention, but perhaps we should engage  
>> there?
>>
>
> Ya, I've seen a few mentions of it on infra, but not completely  
> sure of what the intent is.  They do talk about a shared Continuum  
> on it though.  Not sure if we'd want to take advantage of it, now  
> that we've got our own :)
>
> So, I'm waiting to hear what others think as far as where and how  
> nightlies get published.
>
>> --
>> Martin Cooper
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> James Mitchell
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@struts.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@struts.apache.org