In my company I have such situation.
Making a tag from subfolder.
Git always makes the tag from the root, right?
Let's google something...

On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 2:05 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> wrote:

> thanks for your interest and feedback
>
> Le samedi 7 octobre 2017, 12:00:32 CEST Tibor Digana a écrit :
> > 78 is too much.
> notice that there would also be a question on the git repos naming
> convention,
> to avoid flat 78 names but keep at least 3 meaningful groups (plugins,
> shared,
> resources: I think this is not absolutely necessary for doxia-tools)
>
> > There is no problem to trigger release over sub-folders and tag it with
> > prefix which is already done in SVN.
> is it supported by maven-release plugin with git?
>
> notice I did not know that git was able to tag only a subtree: but I knew I
> don't yet understand every aspect of git magic... :)
>
> > The CI build can always trigger the root and Jenkinsfile would have 41
> > stages for plugins, 26 stages for Shared, etc.
> > It can be done in Jenkinsfile and so the shell would not throw exception
> > but status would be set instead and goes to the next stage.
> > I do not know how to detect in GitSCM which sub-folder(s) received but I
> > guess this can be investigated.
> +1
> but I don't know where to look for myself: on that point, I hope to have
> some
> help from Jenkinsfile experts
> and eventually start with svn, to have something before the git migration
>
> > Then it can be a kind of switch-case over committed folders in
> Jenkinsfile.
> > This means that every time another stage/sub-folder is shown in Pipeline
> > which will be messy in the UI. :(
> notice that we can perhaps split the repos in less parts than we have
> components: on plugins, for example, we already have 4 categories [1] which
> would avoid 1 repo with 41 plugins, but more something like 6+10+10+15
> I suppose we could do the same for shared (reporting folder comes to my
> mind)
>
> The key feasibility issue is the capacity to release a sub-component from
> git
> with maven-release-plugin, IMHO
> (taking apart the git purists idea of 1 lifecycle = 1 git repo)
>
> Regards,
>
> Hervé
>
>
> [1] http://maven.apache.org/plugins/
> >
> > On Sat, Oct 7, 2017 at 4:17 AM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]>
> wrote:
> > > There are 6 svn locations without any special complexity that are
> waiting
> > > for
> > > a volunteer for git migration for a few years but nobody does anything
> > > about:
> > > I started 3 days ago to ask for help about it and got pretty no
> feedback
> > > [1]
> > >
> > > then there are the 4 complex svn locations (plugins, shared, resources,
> > > doxia-
> > > tools) that require much more work: I suppose we can't tell git
> migration
> > > is
> > > abandoned, but it will require someone to work on it seriously
> > > Remember that the key question [2] is: do we transform these 4 svn
> > > locations
> > > into 41 +26 + 6 + 5 = 78 independent git repos?
> > > Yes, I told that Jenkins configuration is one key aspect we need a
> > > strategy
> > > about, in parallel with git strategy.
> > >
> > > then there will be the remaining cases where we need to decide: lower
> > > impact,
> > > lower priority.
> > >
> > >
> > > Summary: nothing is abandoned, but:
> > > - simple cases: no volunteer to do the job
> > > - hard cases: is there a volunteer either to define a strategy or do
> some
> > > work
> > > on it?
> > >
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > >
> > > Hervé
> > >
> > > [1] https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/
> > > edf3642a7bdd515f0cad421c25589741819446463614bf0515e56dbe@
> > > %3Cdev.maven.apache.org%3E
> > >
> > > [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/MAVEN/Git
> > > +Migration#GitMigration-Migratinganaggregatortreeintoa
> collectionofgitrepos
> > >
> > > Le vendredi 6 octobre 2017, 20:35:45 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit :
> > > > But did we completely abandoned the idea of moving everything to git
> ?
> > > > The CI setup was the main stop for it ?
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 8:05 PM, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]
> >
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > > > I was expecting the usual litany
> > > > >
> > > > > what I'm not confident currently with pipeline on Maven core is
> that
> > > > > we
> > > > > have
> > > > > for example the "maven-3.x-jenkinsfile/MNG-6242 - build #1 - null"
> > > > > message,
> > > > > with this "null" part that makes me wonder if we are using it as
> > >
> > > expected.
> > >
> > > > > And for large multi-module svn trunks (the ones we don't migrate to
> > >
> > > git:
> > > > > mainly plugins and shared), is there a solution to rebuild just
> > > > > changed
> > > > > modules?
> > > > >
> > > > > ideally, the rebuild when a SNAPSHOT dependency is published would
> > > > > have
> > > > > been a
> > > > > plus, but this is sufficiently a rare use that I won't be extremist
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Then IIUC, this migration job is one additional TODO for me...
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hervé
> > > > >
> > > > > Le vendredi 6 octobre 2017, 17:46:53 CEST Arnaud Héritier a écrit :
> > > > > > I agree that we should use pipeline nowdays
> > > > > > perhaps a shared lib if we want to standardize some stuffs and a
> set
> > >
> > > of
> > >
> > > > > > multi-branches jobs (or org folder but it requires GitHub :( )
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Stephen Connolly <
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > > On Fri 6 Oct 2017 at 06:32, Hervé BOUTEMY <
> [email protected]>
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > I just fixed a few failing jobs [1] to have again a usable
> > >
> > > Jenkins.
> > >
> > > > > > > > Now I'm facing some issues, I suppose caused by newer Jenkins
> > > > >
> > > > > versions:
> > > > > > > > - Maven 3.0.5 causes NoSuchMethodError:
> > > > > > > > o.c.plexus.util.xml.pull.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > MXParser
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > - I had to switch to JDK 8 for maven-plugin-tools job, since
> JDK
> > > > >
> > > > > causes
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > failures (looks like Jenkins uses a hack to inject JDK 7 as a
> > >
> > > tool
> > >
> > > > > while
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > build JVM is Java 8)
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Should we drop Maven 3.0.5 builds and JDK 7?
> > > > > > > > Notice I didn't check which is the minimum Maven version
> > >
> > > required...
> > >
> > > > > > > > Or perhaps simply don't use the Jenkins Maven plugin with
> this
> > >
> > > Maven
> > >
> > > > > > > 3.0.5
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > or
> > > > > > > > JDK 7 configuration: default build as Jenkins Maven plugin
> with
> > >
> > > JDK
> > >
> > > > > 8 +
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > latest
> > > > > > > > Maven, and other configurations as scripted jobs?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2013/11/jenkins-maven-job-> >
> > > > >
> > > > > type-considered-evil.html
> > > > >
> > > > > > > <http://javaadventure.blogspot.ie/2013/11/jenkins-> >
> > > > >
> > > > > maven-job-type-considered-evil.html?m=1>
> > > > >
> > > > > > > We should stop using the evil job type as it’s minimum Java
> > >
> > > version is
> > >
> > > > > > > dictated by Jenkins’ Java minimum.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > We need to define our common strategy and have a consistent
> > > > > > > > configuration
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > every job understood by everybody
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I recommend Jenkinsfile and the `withMaven` wrapper
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Regards,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Hervé
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [1] https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > [2]
> > > > > > > > https://builds.apache.org/view/M-R/view/Maven/job/maven-> >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > plugin-tools-jdk-1.7/162/console
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> > > > >
> > > > > ---------
> > > > >
> > > > > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sent from my phone
> > > > >
> > > > > ------------------------------------------------------------
> ---------
> > > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> > >
> > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>
>


-- 
Cheers
Tibor

Reply via email to