www-builds mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Uwe Schindler" <uschind...@apache.org>
Subject RE: Hudson access for non-PMC member
Date Wed, 27 Jan 2010 18:45:08 GMT
Hi Grant,

that would be an option, but during our work, Mike and me only activated the "start new build"
button in the GUI, everything else was and had to be done in the shell:
- Updating lucene's private SVN tools for the new lucene rev-based backwards branch (sparse
- Upgrading hudson's clover version for our new coverage reports (that work correct with backwards
- Killing stuck builds (to get a stack trace you have to send a SIGHUP to the stuck JVM first)

You haven’t seen our IRC conversation between Mike and me where we did something like "human
remote control" when changing our build scripts and so on. Something like "tell me whats in
dir xyz", "hmm, ok then we have to.... Ah before tell me if solaris has a toolxy installed!",
"yes", "ah then we can do pqrs first and tar this there". Funny, but worked, but took a day

On the other hand, you can always configure a job that runs with the Hudson account and does
a "rm -rf /hudsoninstalldir" in it - so where is the security?


Uwe Schindler
Apache Lucene Java Committer
Bremen, Germany

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Grant Ingersoll [mailto:gsiasf@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Grant
> Ingersoll
> Sent: Wednesday, January 27, 2010 6:38 PM
> To: builds@apache.org
> Subject: Re: Hudson access for non-PMC member
> Perhaps there is an in-between here, too.  Can't we give access to
> Hudson itself w/o giving access to the machine?  That way, Uwe could
> run and configure the jobs (which is the most common task) w/o
> necessarily needing to deal w/ the machine level stuff.
> -Grant
> On Jan 27, 2010, at 11:04 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
> > On 27/Jan/2010 11:26, Justin Mason wrote:
> >> Hi Philip --
> >> it's purely because the user accounts on the Hudson machines have
> >> quite a lot of privileges.
> >
> > Anything much more significant than people's privileges via their
> > people.a.o accounts?
> >
> >> Personally I'm open to the idea of making an exception if the AVRO
> >> call for it, and assuming none of the other Hudson admins are
> against
> >> it.
> >
> > Not against it, but if there is a flood of new account requests from
> > committers I'd like to examine whether we can roll those machines
> into
> > the existing infra routines.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim

View raw message