I did, but I fixed it. It was something with what I’m adding tot he SPEC
On April 11, 2017 at 12:40:33, David Lyle (dlyle65...@gmail.com) wrote: Do you have something that introduces an error into the RPM build? I'd like to catch it and correct it. -D... On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 11:18 AM, Otto Fowler <ottobackwa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/METRON-843. > > Right now, if the RPM phase of the build pipeline fails, maven just plows > along. I don’t believe this is correct. > If the RPMs fail, the build should fail ( if it was trying to build rpms ). > > So for example, if you do vagrant up in full_dev, but the rpm’s fail to > build, you won’t fail until installing the enrichment service in ambari ( > because the /localrepo is empty ). > I am not sure how we address this, but I think it is important that the > build doesn’t continue in a failed state. > > Also, > > At one point this workflow worked : > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/METRON/ > Metron+Installation+on+an+Ambari-Managed+Cluster > Using a docker image to build the product, and then being able to deploy > etc. > I don’t believe this flow will work now, because the build will try to run > docker ( within docker ) to build the RPM’s. > I am not sure if this is technically true, but I think this is a > regression. But the ambari/rpm flow is new, so that is OK, if we have a > plan on > how we are going to move it forward and iron out the kinks. > > Both of these issues are important ( I think ) on their own. Taken > together, it seems to me that we may want to step back and think about how > how we are using docker > and refactor some of these disparate pieces into a more consistent > approach. > > Thoughts? >
