| Re: [tcf-dev] Hudson instance per project for TCF and TM |
|
Hi Anna, IMO the biggest advantage of HIPP is that we’re more isolated from central Hudson … which appears to be unstable at times, probably due to the huge load of
so many projects. Having our HIPP would mean we can proceed when the central Hudson goes down. CDT is already using HIPP as far as I know , I have asked them about their experiences on the cdt-dev mailing list. http://dev.eclipse.org/mhonarc/lists/cdt-dev/ Thanks, Martin -- Martin Oberhuber, SMTS / Product Architect – Development Tools,
Wind River direct +43.662.457915.85 fax +43.662.457915.6 From: tcf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:tcf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Anna Dushistova Hi All, Dave D. asked me last week to look into getting a separate Hudson instance for TM. According to
http://wiki.eclipse.org/Hudson, HIPP instances are recommended for those projects who prefer flexibility and convenience with their CI system, perhaps at the expense of security and webmaster support. What I like about HIPP: 1) Flexibility(we can have additional plugins, we can create jobs ourselves, it can be configured to write into a project's downloads area and can be given write access to the code repository for automatic tagging
of builds); 2) Gerrit verification job can be migrated there (right now it's running in sandbox which seems to be going away some time soon). What I am concerned about: It is not entirely clear for me if it's possible to run UI tests on HIPP (wiki page mentions that shared instance is recommended for running all the tests) and I don't really want to split our jobs into separate
build job and test job. What do you think? Do we want a HIPP or not? Thanks! Anna. |