> On 03/04/2014 03:06 AM, Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>> Good catch, too bad we can't fix that kind of bug in a single place. I'd love a long term solution that put less code in the jenkins jobs themselves.
> There actually is a way to do it, but it would convert all our lander
> jobs into a single job.
Not sure I follow. What I mean is having jenkins jobs call shell our
python scripts and have the smarts in those scripts so we touch
the jenkins templates less often.
> Francis and chatted about doing that, but thought it would make
> debugging even more difficult.
At least we would be able to test the scripts themselves without
involving jenkins ?
> I suspect this type of stuff is all going away post phase-0, so
> I'll just keep limping it along for now.
>>>>> Andy Doan <email address hidden> writes:
> On 03/04/2014 03:06 AM, Vincent Ladeuil wrote:
>> Good catch, too bad we can't fix that kind of bug in a single place. I'd love a long term solution that put less code in the jenkins jobs themselves.
> There actually is a way to do it, but it would convert all our lander
> jobs into a single job.
Not sure I follow. What I mean is having jenkins jobs call shell our
python scripts and have the smarts in those scripts so we touch
the jenkins templates less often.
> Francis and chatted about doing that, but thought it would make
> debugging even more difficult.
At least we would be able to test the scripts themselves without
involving jenkins ?
> I suspect this type of stuff is all going away post phase-0, so
> I'll just keep limping it along for now.
/me nods