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

CRAYSAT-1771: Change builds to also publish to csm-docker #173

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Oct 24, 2023

Conversation

haasken-hpe
Copy link
Contributor

@haasken-hpe haasken-hpe commented Oct 23, 2023

Summary and Scope

Change container image builds to also publish to csm-docker instead of
just sat-docker in Artifactory. Using csm-docker is more consistent with
how other CSM images are published. Publish to both locations for now to
ease the transition and to make it easier to pull in new builds of
cray-sat into CSM 1.5 patches without pulling in the related changes to
the sat-podman wrapper script.

Publishing to csm-docker has the added benefit of getting us DST image
mirroring without having to set up another mirror for sat-docker.

Issues and Related PRs

Testing

Tested on:

  • Jenkins

Test description:

Checked that Jenkins published to the correct locations in sat-docker and csm-docker.

Risks and Mitigations

Low risk since it just adds another publishing location.

In CSM 1.6, we will pull the cray-sat image from the new location in the csm repo, and we will update the cray-sat-podman wrapper scripts to look in the new location in Nexus when it's uploaded there under the new path.

Pull Request Checklist

  • Version number(s) incremented, if applicable
  • Copyrights updated
  • License file intact
  • Target branch correct
  • CHANGELOG.md updated
  • Testing is appropriate and complete, if applicable
  • HPC Product Announcement prepared, if applicable

@haasken-hpe
Copy link
Contributor Author

Here's the build in the new location in artifactory, so this completes my test description: https://artifactory.algol60.net/ui/repos/tree/General/csm-docker/unstable/cray-sat/3.26.0-20231023175601_7245464

@haasken-hpe
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm having some second thoughts about just flat-out moving the cray-sat container image to csm-docker. I think it's going to make things a little more difficult if I want to include any small new features in future patches for SAT 2.6 and CSM 1.5. If I do that, I'm going to want to pull in a version >= 3.26.0, which will have this change in publishing location. Then this will affect how the image gets uploaded to Nexus, which will then necessitate the backwards-incompatible sat-podman changes. If I just publish to both sat-docker and csm-docker locations for a little while, that should ease the transition since I can just keep pulling newer versions of the container from the sat-docker Artifactory location in CSM 1.5.

I'm going to add back a step that publishes to sat-docker as well as csm-docker. This can be removed when we are no longer needing to patch cray-sat in CSM 1.5

Change container image builds to also publish to csm-docker instead of
just sat-docker in Artifactory. Using csm-docker is more consistent with
how other CSM images are published. Publish to both locations for now to
ease the transition and to make it easier to pull in new builds of
cray-sat into CSM 1.5 patches without pulling in the related changes to
the sat-podman wrapper script.

Publishing to csm-docker has the added benefit of getting us DST image
mirroring without having to set up another mirror for sat-docker.

Test Description:
Will check where Jenkins build publishes the image.
@haasken-hpe haasken-hpe force-pushed the CRAYSAT-1771-move-to-csm-docker branch from cc97668 to 0e8f1c7 Compare October 24, 2023 21:04
@haasken-hpe haasken-hpe changed the title CRAYSAT-1771: Change builds to publish to csm-docker CRAYSAT-1771: Change builds to also publish to csm-docker Oct 24, 2023
@haasken-hpe haasken-hpe merged commit 41f05a5 into main Oct 24, 2023
3 checks passed
@haasken-hpe haasken-hpe deleted the CRAYSAT-1771-move-to-csm-docker branch October 24, 2023 21:26
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.

3 participants