I have setup a Jenkins job to build a project. I'm using email-ext plugin to send out build notifications with the intent of showing who did what and the path to the files changed. But unfortunately I'm not getting anything. I believe the reason why is that under "Source Code Management" I'm setting it to "None". My shell script that I'm using to drive the build is responsible for check-in out a copy of the code based on a CVS tag and run maven to do the build. In the ext-email i'm using the following syntax
${CHANGES_SINCE_LAST_SUCCESS, reverse=true, showPaths=true,
format="\n====\nChanges for Build # %n\n%c\n",
changesFormat="\n[%r] %d %a %m %p\n"}
Same thing with CHANGES: ${CHANGES, showPaths=true}
Is there a way of getting CHANGES and CHANGES_SINCE_LAST_SUCCESS to work if None option is used under Source Code Management?
Thanks for your help folks.
EmailExt plugin gets that info from Jenkins. As Jenkins has access to that info only via its SCM plugins the answer is "no", you can't do it without specifying the SCM option.
There are two things you can do:
(1) Do it by hand. Which with CVS, if I remember correctly, means having a working copy checked out anyway.
(2) Use SCM checkout/update option, but store the working copy on the side without using it in the build. You'll use twice as much disk-space, but nowadays disk-space is not a problem.
By the way, why are you using CVS? SVN, GIT, and Mercurial are all free.
Related
I have this development environment with Eclipse as IDE, SVN as SCM and Jenkins as CI server.
Is there a way I could start a Jenkins job from Eclipse and tell Jenkins somehow to take some code from my Eclipse workspace instead of the SVN? Without committing that code into SVN?
I know how to do the first part (start a job via Mylyn / Builds), but not the second one...
Maybe something like the way TeamCity is integrated into Intellij IDEA and the way they have facilitated gated commits...
It is not a good idea using local workspace for a continious integration tool in my opinion. Jenkins runs on a server machine in a standart configuration not in local machine. I think best practice for your scenario is using SVN branches for test committing. Configure a job in jenkins which works with the SVN branch to chechout the code. Add a svn hook for jenkins to compile after commit. Then integrate the branch to trunk after jenkins successfully build.
You can do anything with Jenkins.
Building code from my local machine in Jenkins is not a good idea though.
If at all you want to achieve this anyway, you can poll specific folder for any change and start building through Jenkins
In a normal freestyle project, I configure the SCM plugin to point to the Git repo that I want to release, and I enable the "Poll SCM" option, which allows me to configure a Stash webhook to tell Jenkins whenever there has been a change to that repo. In this way, the job can be triggered whenever a change is pushed to the repo.
But when I use a workflow instead of a freestyle project, the SCM of the code that I need to build is specified programmatically in the groovy workflow script, which means that it is not listening for the Stash webhook. Instead, the SCM that is configured directly in the workflow is the SCM of the groovy script itself, which is different than the codebase that I am trying to build/release, so I don't want the trigger to be based on that.
node('docker_builder') {
git url: serviceRepo
releaseVersion = getVersion()
pipelineSpec = getPipelineSpec()
sh "./gradlew clean build pushDockerImage"
}
Any ideas about how to achieve SCM polling when using the workflow plugin?
I have resolved this question with lots of research and experimentation. This documentation got me on the right track: https://github.com/jenkinsci/workflow-scm-step-plugin/blob/master/README.md. It says:
Polling is supported across multiple SCMs (changes in one or more will trigger a new build), and again is done according to the SCMs used in the last build of the workflow."
This means that SCM polling is still supported with a Jenkins workflow, but unlike a normal freestyle project, you have to run it once manually before it starts listening for SCM changes. This makes sense because the SCM's are defined in Groovy code; they are not known until they run once.
One tricky element of this is that you can define many SCM's in your workflow. For example, I have three: one for the service itself, a deployment script, and the Groovy workflow DSL. By default, changes to any of those three SCM's would cause the "SCM poll" option to trigger a build, which may not be desirable. Luckily, setting the "poll: false" option on the "git" step in the Groovy code will disable polling on that repo. If you are reading your Groovy DSL from an SCM, then you can disable polling on that repo by clicking "additional behaviors" in the Jenkins UI and adding "Don't trigger a build on commit notifications".
Another tricky element is that the Stash web hook plugin by default includes the SHA1 hash code of the commit in the RESTful URL that it hits Jenkins with. Unfortunately, Jenkins makes the mistake of using that same commit code when it tries to pull any of the multiple SCM's that you may have defined. The hashcode is of course only relevant to one SCM, so it breaks. You can get around this by setting "Omit SHA1 Hash Code" in the Stash web hook plugin. Then Jenkins will just use the latest commit on whatever branch you build from in each of your SCM's.
I am trying to setup a internal Mercurial HgWeb server on a Windows 2003 server. The Hgweb part is working. I could just share a folder to put released binary files for each projects. But I am wandering could I still somehow link the version control system with binary build output. So when there is a commit, the build output will automated get update as well for a release?
I know I could have a build system on the server end. But for Delphi, C#, ASP.NET projects and with a few third-party libraries, it seems much more work.
Right now, I am thinking about for each project I will have two repository, one for development (not output binary), the other for release which will including everything including the build result binaries (or only build result including dependency will be a better idea?). But I don't know yet how to make those two synchronize automatically without manually commit twice.
Maybe simply a hook on Dev repository fires every time commit to Master branch which will make another commit to the Release branch?
You really need a build system like CruiseControl.NET to build your binaries after pushes happen to a remote repository that CC.NET is watching. The binaries built can then just be copied to a standard Web server to be served up for download. CC.NET is not complicated to configure and supports Mercurial out-of-the-box. Using a system like this, you can get the extras like build stats, run unit tests before pushing a build to be downloaded, and lots more.
I'm trying to get continuous integration working using Hudson, Maven & Perforce (with an scm poll used to trigger each build)
One of the requirements is to automatically update POM snapshot version numbers following each successful build.
This is trivial using the Maven release plugin, but the act of checking in the newly versioned POMs triggers another build - which continues ad infinitum.
Is there any way of checking in version updates without triggering another build? There doesn't seem to be any way of excluding specific user checkins, specific changelists, or specific files when the scm poll makes the decision to rebuild.
This seems like a basic requirement - been doing it for years using Cruise Control / Ant / Perforce,
Cheers,
Mark
I have been contemplating a move to Hudson, but the inability to exclude specific files from the scm poll would be a deal breaker. Did you also ask this question on the Hudson mailing list?
users <at> hudson <dot> dev <dot> java <dot> net
The only workaround I can see from reading through the docs seems to be triggering builds based on p4 triggers, where you could then programmatically do whatever you want, but that doesn't seem to be a very simple approach.
I don't believe there is any way to configure Hudson to omit part of a Perforce workspace when polling. You may have better luck by setting up two different workspaces - one for build test using a default POM and one for your releases with the auto-updated release POM. The two workspaces could differ on just this one file and modifying the release POM would not trigger a new build.
Check out how to do individual file mapping in a workspace in the P4Guide.
Its possible to update the description of a changelist after it has been submitted, so if you build to a certain changelist number you can then update the description of that changelist to include your build number. This shouldnt trigger a new build.
What is "POM"?
You can have Hudson "Create or Update Label in Perforce" (see near the bottom of your project's configuration.) You could use that along with the BUILD_NUMBER environment variable that Hudson provides, giving you unique build numbers and stamped P4 labels of said build.
I have all tagging, ChangeLog updates, and packaging done by our checked in build code. This allows us to:
Create RC and appropriate tags without starting anther build
Allows us to debug all aspects of our build on any dev machine, not just those with Hudson.
Allows us to exactly recreate how a package, tag, etc was done in at any point in the past.
I had a similar problem checking in compiled src. I was able to find an alternative but i did consider the following.
In hudson specify a child folder of your project to poll. I.e. don't actually have hudson check out your project, just an incidental folder.
Add a shell script to check out your project proper.
Run you normal scripts.
check in your pom. The trick here is that the folder being polled won[t have changed at this point.
Not ideal, but works.
The perforce plugin has had polling masks for a while now. It's in the Advanced section under "View Mask".
Basically, you list a subset of files that you want polling to check for changes. Unfortunately there's no easy way to exclude files, so you'll have to create a list of file specs that specify everything BUT the file you want to exclude. So if the version is contained in a pom.xml, I would need to specify the files and directories that don't contain it.
For example, if your directory structure looked like this:
./pom.xml
./lib/
./src/
You would specify,
//depot/project/lib/...
//depot/project/src/...
as the view mask, and check the checkbox to use it only for polling. There are a few limitations with this feature, such as not being able to use '-' to exclude file specs, but it's still a workable solution for now.
I have a task to check compilation of code from one of our branches, lets call it "stable". Our team mainly working in "HEAD" branch and sometimes making some merges to "stable" branch. I've made a local copy of our main workspace and named it "main-workspace-stable" and replaced all of the code by code from "stable" branch. Now at the end of every work day I open that workspace, update the code to the most recent and wait for the compilation result.
This is pretty boring. Is there any ways to automate that task?
You might want to look at one of the Continuous Integration tools, for example Cruise Control or Hudson.
As mentioned by ChssPly76, Continuous Integration is the way to implement what you want to do.
Regarding Hudson, I can mention hudson-eclipse, in order for you to monitor a Hudson health icon, displayed at the bottom of the Eclipse window. The icon is red on build failure and green on success.
You can couple that with an automatic publication of your project as a maven snapshot artifact (also triggered by Hudson).
And have Maven compile your Eclipse project in that special Continuous Integration Environment.
The idea is not to rely on a pure Eclipse solution, because eclipse cannot be up and running every environment, especially those where you do not actively develop, but only compile and launch tests.