Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Initial .gitlab-ci.yml script #956

Merged
merged 63 commits into from
Jan 19, 2022
Merged

Conversation

NadirRoGue
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

Copy link
Member

@matz-e matz-e left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry, GitLab YAML extension is a global-namespaced mess.

We set a default tag in the HPC pipelines that seems to get in the way of your docker builds. I've added some comments on how to override this and set it again for the spack jobs.

As an alternative, you could also spawn a separate pipeline for the HPC/Spack stuff, like here: https://bbpgitlab.epfl.ch/hpc/circuit-building/touchreader/-/blob/main/.gitlab-ci.yml

Since you don't want any ctest stuff back, that would be nicely isolated, and a workaround to missing namespaces.

NadirRoGue and others added 3 commits December 20, 2021 09:26
Co-authored-by: Matthias Wolf <matthias.wolf@epfl.ch>
Co-authored-by: Matthias Wolf <matthias.wolf@epfl.ch>
Co-authored-by: Matthias Wolf <matthias.wolf@epfl.ch>
@NadirRoGue
Copy link
Contributor Author

@matz-e Thanks for the help! ILl separate the spack build on a different pipline as you suggested

@matz-e
Copy link
Member

matz-e commented Dec 20, 2021

@matz-e Thanks for the help! ILl separate the spack build on a different pipline as you suggested

Sorry this didn't work. I'm kind of puzzled, in the expanded YAML in the GitLab CI, it does not seem to reflect the latest changes (should also note that the Github vs GitLab sync sometimes lags up to ~5 min).

Separate pipelines make things clearer, though, even if they are more work.

DATADIR: /tmp

# TEST: TO BE REMOVED BEFORE MERGE!!!
rules:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

FWIW, these rules should then be located on the worklfow level or even in the parent pipeline, conditionally creating the subpipeline. Preferably the latter, as subpipelines will fail if there's no job created for them.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks, changed!

@NadirRoGue
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hey @matz-e , thanks a lot for the help, now spack pipeline seems to be running, although it doesnt seem to be building brayns?

@NadirRoGue
Copy link
Contributor Author

@matz-e Definitely! It should be easy now to migrate any pipeline to gitlab!

brayns-spack-build:
extends: .spack_build
stage: test
variables:
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

These variable blocks could still be on the file level? Did that not work? Especially since they are repeated 3 times :)

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!, Just made them file level to test it again (didnt really test them the previous time)
For the .ctest job, we are adding CTests in brayns, but seems like spack cannot find them. Is there any special way we have to set them up, or any variable I am not declaring for it?

@NadirRoGue
Copy link
Contributor Author

retest this please

@NadirRoGue NadirRoGue merged commit a4ed4cf into develop Jan 19, 2022
@NadirRoGue NadirRoGue deleted the BRAYNS_306_Migrate_CI_to_Gitlab branch January 19, 2022 11:12
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants