1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
127
128
129
130
|
Return-Path: <ick-discuss-bounces@ick.liw.fi>
X-Original-To: distix@pieni.net
Delivered-To: distix@pieni.net
Received: from yaffle.pepperfish.net (yaffle.pepperfish.net [88.99.213.221])
by pieni.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E75EF406EB
for <distix@pieni.net>; Thu, 5 Apr 2018 09:10:11 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from platypus.pepperfish.net (unknown [10.112.101.20])
by yaffle.pepperfish.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C53A641840
for <distix@pieni.net>; Thu, 5 Apr 2018 10:10:11 +0100 (BST)
Received: from ip6-localhost.nat ([::1] helo=platypus.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtp (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1f40uJ-0003h6-Ni; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 10:10:11 +0100
Received: from [10.112.101.104] (helo=mx4.pepperfish.net)
by platypus.pepperfish.net with esmtps (Exim 4.80 #2 (Debian))
id 1f40uI-0003gt-Vh
for <ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi>; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 10:10:11 +0100
Received: from mail.steve.org.uk ([176.9.183.102] helo=ssh.steve.org.uk)
by mx4.pepperfish.net with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <steve@steve.org.uk>) id 1f40uE-0005N2-Ub
for ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 09:10:10 +0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=steve.org.uk; s=20150726; h=References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:Date:Subject:
From:Cc:To:Sender:Reply-To:MIME-Version:Content-Type:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:
Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:
List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive;
bh=NXSwnVIkvJUhy4QWC+LS8UuvMyQsYmz89Ofjvx2CQZ8=; b=Cp0f+HjrdS/PPoDW4aMxKj0i7
T22GcNHhmAlKPKNKKESzeXoZo9Dm505iD8W7nmYiFMihIiz4dLehuNakGvESOoZczxWPOpqxn+CsU
Q/ayPMmeuA6Twyexvgwx7MfYrt6zTj5kAfrNUFjicTnDMwUsrCdg9Fd10c7p7Fxi9Ch/I=;
Received: from steve by ssh.steve.org.uk with local (Exim 4.89)
(envelope-from <steve@steve.org.uk>) id 1f40u7-0007BE-AZ
for ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi; Thu, 05 Apr 2018 09:09:59 +0000
To: ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi
Cc:
From: Steve Kemp <steve@steve.org.uk>
Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2018 09:01:15 +0000
Message-ID: <1522918875.22924.0@ssh.steve.org.uk>
In-Reply-To: <1522917706.3679.0.camel@liw.fi>
References: <1522917706.3679.0.camel@liw.fi>
X-added-header: steve.org.uk
X-Pepperfish-Transaction: 488f-3e01-9c53-eb2c
X-Spam-Score: 3.4
X-Spam-Score-int: 34
X-Spam-Bar: +++
X-Scanned-By: pepperfish.net, Thu, 05 Apr 2018 09:10:10 +0000
X-Spam-Report: Content analysis details: (3.4 points)
pts rule name description
---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
2.5 PPF_GTLD_LONG Long gTLD, probably cheap throw-away domain
-0.0 T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD Envelope sender domain matches handover relay
domain
1.0 BAYES_50 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 40 to 60%
[score: 0.5000]
-0.1 DKIM_VALID Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
-0.1 DKIM_VALID_AU Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
0.1 DKIM_SIGNED Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
X-ACL-Warn: message may be spam
X-Scan-Signature: 37750eb53cbbcd37f0cf4d6178be310e
Subject: Re: Architecture doc updated - feedback welcom
X-BeenThere: ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: discussions about the ick CI system <ick-discuss-ick.liw.fi>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ick-discuss-ick.liw.fi>,
<mailto:ick-discuss-request@ick.liw.fi?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://listmaster.pepperfish.net/pipermail/ick-discuss-ick.liw.fi>
List-Post: <mailto:ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi>
List-Help: <mailto:ick-discuss-request@ick.liw.fi?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ick-discuss-ick.liw.fi>,
<mailto:ick-discuss-request@ick.liw.fi?subject=subscribe>
Sender: ick-discuss-bounces@ick.liw.fi
Errors-To: ick-discuss-bounces@ick.liw.fi
> Any review and feedback would be welcome. Especially about things that
> are unclear or missing.
In your example project you use inline python to execute the
three jobs "get_source", "build_ikiwiki_site" & "publish_html",
but I see that the action of the last task is defined as:
actions:
- shell: |
Which looks like a mistake, as it doesn't match the previous
entries.
(Might be nice to make it use a shell-command, to show how
the steps allow non-python!)
In the section "Getting an access token" you have a broken/bogus
markdown link "[Qvisqve][]".
All in all this is a great read, I only have two lingering
concerns:
* Each pipeline acts in the same workspace. The entire pipeline is
executed on the same worker.
* Credential management.
The first choice, to let all things work on the same worker, is
obviously simplest. It means that the existing workspace is present
and you don't need to use your artifact storage-system to upload
any in-progress work, and then refetch it. But I suspect that
in complex pipelines running jobs in parallel would be nice.
With regard to credentials I wonder how you'd clone the source
of a private repository, via git. I could imagine a (horrid)
hack using:
echo "ssh ..." > .ssh/id_rsa
ssh-keyscan git.example.com > .ssh/known_hosts
git clone ..
But that is obviously horrid. Do you have any plans to allow
credentials such that private repositories can be cloned? (I
appreciate that this doesn't really belong in the architecture
guide per se.)
Steve
--
https://www.steve.org.uk/
_______________________________________________
ick-discuss mailing list
ick-discuss@ick.liw.fi
https://listmaster.pepperfish.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ick-discuss-ick.liw.fi
|
