+1
I think selection needs to be a combination of capability, permission
and availability. I would mostly prefer the user is in full control of
selecting these rather than having too much magic (automated selection
might be a nice feature, but the basic starting point should be a
fully configured system).
- Brett
On 17/01/2009, at 1:36 PM, Christian Edward Gruber wrote:
I guess then having agent groups as a logical group, but make group
be part of the criteria would help with that then, group effectively
being a property of the agent.
The key for me is to have the whole thing specified as constraints,
not explicit solutions, so that new agents can be launched and they
will automatically fit into the constraints based on their
configuration, rather than having to add them to this or that build
definition. Filter/constraint configuration is a great way to
simplify config, especially with large banks of agents.
Christian
On 17-Jan-09, at 16:22 , Wendy Smoak wrote:
I can see that working, if I can define arbitrary criteria like a
property name/value.
I need a way to make sure that Top Secret Project X builds on agents
3, 5 and 14 only, and that no other projects ever build on those
agents.
--
Wendy
On Sat, Jan 17, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Christian Edward Gruber
<[email protected]> wrote:
Rather than agent groups, could we go with a criteria approach?
That is to
say, you can describe and agent's capabilities, then associate
criteria for
a project group or project, and then let the system sort out which
agents
can fulfill which criteria?
Christian E. Gruber - President / Senior Consultant
email: [email protected]
Isráfíl Consulting Services Corporation
mobile: +1 (289) 221-9839
"Keenness of understanding is due to keenness of vision..."
phone: +1 (905) 640-1119
--
Brett Porter
[email protected]
http://blogs.exist.com/bporter/
