tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post656162736273742075..comments2011-06-11T09:33:18.434+03:00Comments on Nash Code Bar: Split Hudson jobsbarnashhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07200307798569022096noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-57109540185762316112011-06-11T09:33:18.434+03:002011-06-11T09:33:18.434+03:00Hi,
I didn't try it with Maven, I recall it wa...Hi,<br />I didn't try it with Maven, I recall it was a bit more difficult because Jenkins has a special job type for a Maven job. I guess it's possible to do this with Maven and shouldn't be a problem.<br /><br />I'm pretty sure that at least you can define the first job to run with Maven and maybe only the second job will be a problem.<br />If you try it, I'll be happy to hear the results.barnashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07200307798569022096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-47977824769192220302011-06-10T19:50:41.098+03:002011-06-10T19:50:41.098+03:00Has anyone tried this with Maven?Has anyone tried this with Maven?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-63342729472551613072010-12-02T13:21:47.846+02:002010-12-02T13:21:47.846+02:00Thanks, Maven is working a bit differently. Becaus...Thanks, Maven is working a bit differently. Because Hudson has support for modules inside maven and maven has it's own life-cycle when running tests it's a bit different.<br />Let me know if you find a nice solution.barnashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07200307798569022096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-53255936639748569312010-12-02T12:51:33.548+02:002010-12-02T12:51:33.548+02:00Nice work, I'm struggling with this type of pr...Nice work, I'm struggling with this type of problem myself at the moment. Your post has given me some good ideas (I use Maven, not Ant, so I can't copy it exactly).Andrew Swanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15503990445307630654noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-59546845232903583802010-10-15T20:08:07.698+02:002010-10-15T20:08:07.698+02:00Thanks for the blog, very helpful.Thanks for the blog, very helpful.Hayden Joneshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07507795100417272909noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-5126234808552903612010-08-12T16:35:04.907+03:002010-08-12T16:35:04.907+03:00Yes, you are right. that's a problem that you ...Yes, you are right. that's a problem that you have when you separate the tests from the source code.<br /><br />If it's a big problem, you might want to put the tests and the source code in the same repository and when you build job1 do a tag for a successful build.<br />Then in job2 you can checkout the tag instead of the trunk and I think it will solve the problem.<br /><br />The last thing you can do is try the workspace sharing feature, although I didn't really investigate it too much yet. I hope I'll get the chance to try it out and write another post about it :)<br /><br />Thanks for the comment!barnashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07200307798569022096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-51577042818696553132010-08-12T15:58:01.468+03:002010-08-12T15:58:01.468+03:00Here's the rub:
We've set up job2 to wait...Here's the rub:<br /><br />We've set up job2 to wait for job1.<br /><br />Suppose job1-101 is building because someone has added a new method and a new long-running unit test that exercises that method.<br /><br />If Hudson started building job2-51 before job1-101 finishes, it would fail because the method had never been built. Yet, the code could be picture-perfect, and would build just fine in a (slow) end-to-end build.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10901231511093831357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-91445049726452161122010-08-12T11:55:56.556+03:002010-08-12T11:55:56.556+03:00Good question, if I got it right, I think it does ...Good question, if I got it right, I think it does work that way.<br />Let me try and explain.<br /><br />let's say you have job1-100 and job2-50.<br />job1-100 is stable and job2-50 is not stable.<br /><br />Now someone added something in job1 project and a build is scheduled and started running. Now you have job1-101 running, let's say it's already been running for 2 hours (you said it can take 5 hours).<br />now someone checks in something for job2, and we have job2-51 running. The job2-51 was scheduled because something has changed in the code of job2, so it will take the last successful build of job1 - which is job1-100.<br /><br />Now we are in a situation when job1 is finished while job2 is still running. Another job2 build will be scheduled for after job2-51 is finished and job2-52 will depend on job1-101.<br /><br />I hope it answers your question..barnashhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07200307798569022096noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-41530718625992523942010-08-11T22:27:22.343+03:002010-08-11T22:27:22.343+03:00You asked some great questions in "the boring...You asked some great questions in "the boring part" (which was actually the interesting part to me), but I didn't quite get how you addressed them.<br /><br />Suppose Job 2 is unstable -- some tests are failing.<br /><br />While Job 1 is building, someone checks in the final fix for Job 2. This is a definite possibility for us, since Jobs 1 and 2 take 5 hours apiece :-(<br /><br />When the time comes to build Job 2, I really want this job to build twice -- the first time, I want it to build with the SCM version that Job 1 had, and then I want it to build a second time with the SCM version that contains that pesky test fix.<br /><br />Do your jobs work that way, and if so, how?Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10901231511093831357noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-83202580663077451262010-07-31T23:31:09.568+03:002010-07-31T23:31:09.568+03:00Wow, you really DO code like a barnash, you...Wow, you really DO code like a barnash, you...Yonitsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8934853196953131018.post-7585301518241514992010-07-31T20:58:06.816+03:002010-07-31T20:58:06.816+03:00Wow thanks man! This is great stuff. Obviously you...Wow thanks man! This is great stuff. Obviously you know your way around CI.Nimrodnoreply@blogger.com