Isn't the "get everything" Ant regex something like **** or ***/**?
If you continue looking at workflow, also check out the *stash* and *unstash *steps. Similar purpose and syntax but more applicable to intermediate stages where you don't need to retain the artifacts. You can also refer to the batch of *stash*ed artifacts by an arbitrary logical name for downstream *unstash*ing. On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 6:53:56 AM UTC-8, John D. Ament wrote: > > Hi, > > I definitely thought about workflow. It looks promising. > > One question though - I can't seem to archive/unarchive everything. It > looks like to use unarchiver you need to know the paths that will be > exposed, and instead I'd like to just get everything, including class > files. Is that possible? > > John > > On Thursday, December 24, 2015 at 1:49:01 AM UTC-5, Baptiste Mathus wrote: >> >> Hi John, >> >> Not sure what you call a pipeline job, do you mean 'workflow job'? or do >> you use the term in a generic way and actually have many (freestyle) jobs >> you're coordinating? >> >> If the latter, then it really seems like a use case for a workflow job >> (using the workflow plugin). Using/archiving etc. artifacts and being able >> to share the ws during the build is gonna be both more natural and more >> maintainable (and more robust because of the durability). >> >> My 2 cents >> Le 24 déc. 2015 3:46 AM, "John D. Ament" <john.d...@gmail.com> a écrit : >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I was wondering if anyone had any best practices or tips to share on >>> have a common workspace for a pipeline job. >>> >>> Basically, I have a series of pipeline jobs and I want them to have a >>> single workspace for the duration of the job chain. I compile the >>> artifacts once, running unit tests, followed by a suite of integration and >>> BDD tests. It's a fairly complicated build, including generating an app >>> server and minifying a lot of javascript for our UI. Some of these steps >>> are pretty long, and in total we have 4 pipeline steps. I figure by doing >>> this once, I would cut out about 40 minutes of rebuild time in my pipeline. >>> >>> One idea I had was to use the clone workspace plugin to copy them, >>> https://wiki.jenkins-ci.org/display/JENKINS/Clone+Workspace+SCM+Plugin, >>> but it seems like this isn't pipeline sensitive since each step in the >>> pipeline should be building the same commit. I also thought about copying >>> artifacts, but it seems like its a huge number of artifacts. Could I build >>> a zip with the contents? >>> >>> Any thoughts? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> John >>> >>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "Jenkins Users" group. >>> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send >>> an email to jenkinsci-use...@googlegroups.com. >>> To view this discussion on the web visit >>> https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/3c25d084-56c8-4242-a6e0-a0b347ea0af8%40googlegroups.com >>> >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/3c25d084-56c8-4242-a6e0-a0b347ea0af8%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. >>> >> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Users" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/efb5de9c-5c33-46dd-a443-4761652f7c20%40googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
