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

Add pipeline for building PCL's environment docker image #3843

Merged
merged 19 commits into from
May 4, 2020

Conversation

kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi commented Apr 1, 2020

Features:

  • Runs on master and PR
  • Only runs when the file is modified
  • Runs everyweek to keep the image updated
  • No image updates on PR

squash-worthy

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi added changelog: new feature Meta-information for changelog generation module: ci needs: feedback Specify why not closed/merged yet labels Apr 1, 2020
Copy link
Member

@taketwo taketwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we really need a daily build (vs. weekly or bi-weekly)? Our CI job queue is often full, why stressing it more?

.ci/azure-pipelines/env.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

Do we really need a daily build

Nope. Just added to keep it up to date. Frequency doesn't matter.

.ci/azure-pipelines/env.yml Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

Lots of trial and error

@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented Apr 2, 2020

Let's get a look consistent with our other pipelines:

image

  1. When I setup a new pipeline on Azure, I'll call it Docker.Env (in line with Build.Ubuntu, Build.Windows).
  2. Inside the pipeline, no need to repeat "env docker image" in the job title because it will be a part of the pipeline name.
  3. No need to repeat tag in the step names, that's evident from the job name.

image

Edit: and for the YAML filename I'd prefer docker-env.yaml, again to match the naming of other pipelines.

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

How does this look?

@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented Apr 2, 2020

This looks almost perfect! It's just that "Env" is still duplicated:

image

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

So the env in the title is from title, and that can't go away. Shall I replace the other env with "Image" or "Tag" or make it empty? Are job titles allowed to be empty?

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi marked this pull request as ready for review April 2, 2020 20:46
@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi added the needs: testing Specify why not closed/merged yet label Apr 6, 2020
@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi self-assigned this Apr 6, 2020
@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented Apr 22, 2020

How is it going?

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi marked this pull request as draft April 22, 2020 19:38
@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

I don't have access to my 'build' hardware, so didn't test.

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

kunaltyagi commented Apr 23, 2020

Only built common, geometry and a few other (non-CUDA/GPU) modules. No issues in compilation for the 16.04+CUDA-9.2

Let me add a verify stage to the CI for CI based verification

EDIT: I did, and all ubuntu CI pass with flying colors (for reduced set of modules)

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi force-pushed the azure-docker branch 3 times, most recently from 18db71b to 22e366c Compare April 23, 2020 06:53
@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

Do you think it makes sense to integrate all into 1 pipeline?

  1. Build docker image conditionally (my addition, stage 1)
  2. Use the image to compile (current pipeline), confirms docker image if it was updated
  3. Push image if compile succeeded (my addition, last stage)

The only thing I don't know is if docker images are persistent over stages.

Also, how do I run a step after all steps, like a cleanup step (especially after failure)? This is to delete the docker image if compile or push fails (to prevent bad caching on the local machine)

@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented Apr 23, 2020

Do you think it makes sense to integrate all into 1 pipeline?

Maybe. Maybe not. I'd propose to start with having a separate docker pipeline. This will be an improvement already. If after some time we feel like this separation limits us, then we can consider your proposal.

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

In that case, I'll consider this ready for review. PTAL

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi marked this pull request as ready for review April 23, 2020 14:51
Copy link
Member

@taketwo taketwo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

🚀

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi added needs: code review Specify why not closed/merged yet and removed needs: testing Specify why not closed/merged yet labels Apr 25, 2020
@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

@taketwo it needs a connection with the name (and passwd) on Azure in order to run correctly

@SergioRAgostinho SergioRAgostinho removed the needs: code review Specify why not closed/merged yet label Apr 25, 2020
@SergioRAgostinho
Copy link
Member

@taketwo it needs a connection with the name (and passwd) on Azure in order to run correctly

Feel free to merge this at your own convenience since I'm unsure if this is ok to merge given your last comment.

@kunaltyagi kunaltyagi merged commit c255997 into PointCloudLibrary:master May 4, 2020
@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented May 4, 2020

I'm also unsure, is there an action item for me?

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks to Sergio, who also has DockerHub access: No 😄

The pipeline is live: https://dev.azure.com/PointCloudLibrary/pcl/_build?definitionId=11&_a=summary

@taketwo
Copy link
Member

taketwo commented May 4, 2020

Awesome. Should we also setup DockerHub access for you?

@kunaltyagi
Copy link
Member Author

Already done courtesy of Sergio

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog: new feature Meta-information for changelog generation module: ci
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants