[users at bb.net] 2 checkout steps in the same builder

[Francesco Di Mizio]

Came across a bit of an issue.

Is it possible that wehn calling addBuildsetForSourceStamps with 2
sourcestamps, buildbot will create 2 buildrequests and then only collapse
them when one of the 2 kicks in?
Those 2 buildrequests in fact show up as 2 distinct ones in the web ui
until the build starts. When it does one will remain.

However they still seem to exist after being collapsed

api/v2/buildrequests?buildsetid=1&field=buildrequestid&field=claimed_at&field=builderid&field=buildsetid

returns 2 identical buildrequests

  "buildrequests": [
    {
      "builderid": 3,
      "buildrequestid": 1,
      "buildsetid": 1,
      "claimed_at": 1447786507
    },
    {
      "builderid": 3,
      "buildrequestid": 1,
      "buildsetid": 1,
      "claimed_at": 1447786507
    }






On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:30 PM, Francesco Di Mizio <
francescodimizio at gmail.com> wrote:

> it indeed worked very well. It was not clear to me that in the source step
> I was allowed to pass in the code base I want the step to deal with!
>
> Much appreciated
>
> Francesco
>
> On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:26 AM, Pierre Tardy <tardyp at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes, this is a very common use case that should fall upon the the
>> codebase principle. You should really try and use codebase.
>>
>> Le lun. 16 nov. 2015 à 23:51, Francesco Di Mizio <
>> francescodimizio at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>
>>> To clarify a bit more. The code coming from git is not part of the final
>>> product. The product infact does not depend at all on the code in Git. Git
>>> only contains code to help build what comes from p4. Also Github will never
>>> produce by itself a change to be built, those chances will only come from
>>> perforce.
>>>
>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Francesco Di Mizio <
>>> francescodimizio at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hey Pierre,
>>>>
>>>> in my case there's no change triggering the build. Or better all I have
>>>> is a web app kicking a cutom scheduler in turn calling
>>>> addBuildsetForSourceStamps
>>>> Right now I am using a single Sourcestamp with an empty string named
>>>> codebase to feed addBuildsetForSourceStamps
>>>> Should I just pass two SourceStamps in to addBuildsetForSourceStamps?
>>>>
>>>> I am not sure if that's what I need. Ideally if a build fails and I
>>>> want to re-build the same thing, I'd like Git to always get latest. Hope
>>>> it's a bit more clear now.
>>>>
>>>> Thanks,
>>>>  Francesco
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Nov 16, 2015 at 9:08 PM, Pierre Tardy <tardyp at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Francesco,
>>>>>
>>>>> You need to specify two different codebases for your two git steps.
>>>>> The source steps are overriding the branch arguments if there is a
>>>>> change triggering the build. changes are associated to codebase, and will
>>>>> only work for the corresponding source steps.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Le lun. 16 nov. 2015 à 19:34, Francesco Di Mizio <
>>>>> francescodimizio at gmail.com> a écrit :
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello guys,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> my main checkout step is a p4 step. This is the repo that's got stuff
>>>>>> I am interested into having compiling and tested.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My build scripts are coming from github. When I add a git step to
>>>>>> check them out, Git step will no matter what use the branch property. Such
>>>>>> a property (say 'main') only makes sense for the p4 step. I need to use an
>>>>>> other property for the git step (like 'master') .
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Docs say
>>>>>>
>>>>>> @param branch: The branch or tag to check out by default. If
>>>>>> a build specifies a different branch, it will
>>>>>> be used instead of this.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So no matter what I pass to the step as branch, it'll still use the
>>>>>> branch property. Any idea how to work this around? Basically I dont have to
>>>>>> build a CI system around the git repo, ideally I'd just like to blindly
>>>>>> check out its branches.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On a side note: is that way renderables beheave (just like 'branch'
>>>>>> is a renderable for Git step)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many thanks,
>>>>>>  Frank
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> users mailing list
>>>>>> users at buildbot.net
>>>>>> https://lists.buildbot.net/mailman/listinfo/users
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.buildbot.net/pipermail/users/attachments/20151117/7e5bb5d8/attachment.html>