Hi Pam, The move away from building against staging dependencies has been planned and announced for Amsterdam since early September, and teams should have started making the transition since RC0. We understand that the transition would take time, which is why we waited as long as possible to turn on the enforcement. Given that the release is only one week away, we needed to turn the enforcement on now in order for teams to have adequate time to formally release their artifacts.
On the implementation specifics: You should not need to change or remove your build jobs; instead, for each dependency that you had coming from staging, those upstream teams need to formally release their artifacts. After that's done, your builds should complete successfully by retrieving those same artifact versions from the Releases repo. Also, this only affects Java/Maven artifacts. You should still be able to produce and use STAGING docker images, but the Java/Maven artifacts contained within those docker images should be the released versions. Thanks, Gary -----Original Message----- From: pdrag...@research.att.com via RT [mailto:onap-helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 8:48 AM To: Gary Wu <gary.i...@huawei.com> Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [ONAP Helpdesk #45447] [integration] Maven repo precedence issue Gary, This breaks current projects whose release jobs on the master branch are producing Staging artifacts. I will now have to remove those jobs. I understand for a formal release process you don’t want staging in the mix. But unfortunately perhaps this could have been done post Amsterdam release. Pam On 11/9/17, 3:12 PM, "onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org on behalf of Gary Wu via RT" <onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org on behalf of onap-helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org> wrote: Thanks Jess. All teams: Please make sure that you are no longer building against staging artifacts. If you still have dependencies on staging artifacts, please contact the upstream teams to make sure that they formally release those artifacts. Thanks, Gary -----Original Message----- From: Jessica Wagantall via RT [mailto:onap-helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 11:51 AM To: Gary Wu <gary.i...@huawei.com> Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org Subject: [ONAP Helpdesk #45447] [integration] Maven repo precedence issue Dear Gary, We have now removed the staging as an active profile from global-settings.xml now and the dependencies should now be downloaded from releases. Thanks! Jess On Mon Nov 06 13:43:31 2017, gary.i...@huawei.com wrote: > Hi Jessica, > > Thanks for the investigation. At this point in the release cycle, I > think the better solution now is to just completely remove staging > from settings.xml. All teams should be formally releasing their > artifacts by now, and we should no longer be having any build > dependencies on staging artifacts. This would completely eliminate > the precedence issue. > > Thanks, > Gary > > -----Original Message----- > From: Jessica Wagantall via RT [mailto:onap- > helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org] > Sent: Friday, November 03, 2017 6:21 PM > To: Gary Wu <gary.i...@huawei.com> > Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org > Subject: [ONAP Helpdesk #45447] [integration] Maven repo precedence > issue > > Dear Gary, > > I was briefly talking with Andy about this ticket. > > I made a test in the sandbox in where I am changing the values that > global-settings have as the active profiles. Basically, this file has > the releases, staging, snapshot active profiles described in that > order. This file controls the precedence of the repos where is going > to do the downloads. > > Here is a run on the job with that described global settings: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jenkins.onap.org_sandbox_job_integration-2Dmaster-2Dversion-2D&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=jwTiArcEj6aUX0HjV0M3dT12gUtk7rC07xpgpVZkS_4&m=Ddx1EMIdNutEneZ6mWVntIrLKGz6DW56oB0qCeUGoC8&s=e_2kEzSAMTHe5p59EWQMOzpqK0vycI1I2UhrTxCznc8&e= > manifest-release-version-java-daily/2/console > This job downloaded the release version of oparent: 00:53:19 [INFO] > Downloaded: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__nexus.onap.org_content_repositories_releases_org_onap_oparent_&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=jwTiArcEj6aUX0HjV0M3dT12gUtk7rC07xpgpVZkS_4&m=Ddx1EMIdNutEneZ6mWVntIrLKGz6DW56oB0qCeUGoC8&s=KIlzTtoSbQMpwWEBZs6FPh-6jOZ1SMl6m1Iza2pwLmc&e= > oparent/0.1.1/oparent- > 0.1.1.pom (21 KB at 430.4 KB/sec) > > I did a small test in which I removed the releases profile and the > download happened from the public repo: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jenkins.onap.org_sandbox_job_integration-2Dmaster-2Dversion-2D&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=jwTiArcEj6aUX0HjV0M3dT12gUtk7rC07xpgpVZkS_4&m=Ddx1EMIdNutEneZ6mWVntIrLKGz6DW56oB0qCeUGoC8&s=e_2kEzSAMTHe5p59EWQMOzpqK0vycI1I2UhrTxCznc8&e= > manifest-release-version-java-daily/6/console > > Another thing that Andy mentioned, is that whenever this download > fails, the log will report the last place where it looked for the > binaries. For example, if we ask the job to look into releases and > then staging, if it fails it will report the failure while looking > into staging making the log look like it didn't looked in releases > even though it actually did. It just happens that maven will report > the failure making reference to the last profile it looked into. > > Let me know if you would like to make more tests with my setup, I can > place the jobs in the Sandbox for us to experiment more. > > Thanks! > Jess > > On Tue Oct 24 00:29:23 2017, gary.i...@huawei.com wrote: > > This issue is still occurring and still needs LF resolution. > > > > Thanks, > > Gary > > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Kenny Paul via RT [mailto:onap- > > helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org] > > Sent: Sunday, October 22, 2017 7:43 PM > > To: Gary Wu <gary.i...@huawei.com> > > Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org > > Subject: [ONAP Helpdesk #45447] [integration] Maven repo precedence > > issue > > > > I’m reviewing all of the tickets in the LF IT queue that are open. > > Is this still an issue that needs support from IT or can this > > ticket be closed? > > > > Thanks! > > -kenny > > > > On Wed Sep 06 17:18:23 2017, gary.i...@huawei.com wrote: > > > I just noticed the issue today, but I suspect it's been happening > > > for a long time. > > > > > > Thanks, > > > Gary > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Jessica Wagantall via RT [mailto:onap- > > > helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org] > > > Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 2017 2:10 PM > > > To: Gary Wu <gary.i...@huawei.com> > > > Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org > > > Subject: [ONAP Helpdesk #45447] [integration] Maven repo > > > precedence issue > > > > > > Hey Gary, quick question.. did you saw this happening the time we > > > released oparent 0.1.0? > > > > > > Thanks! > > > Jess > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Ddiscuss&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=jwTiArcEj6aUX0HjV0M3dT12gUtk7rC07xpgpVZkS_4&m=Ddx1EMIdNutEneZ6mWVntIrLKGz6DW56oB0qCeUGoC8&s=Jx8baUGNtbF92S9uj_zeN9baBpMuQyzCXGagwpFwAl0&e= _______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
