Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[QG Part 3] RANCHER-1247 folioCiQualityGates failing during parallel env provisioning #447

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: RANCHER-1001
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

OHaimanov
Copy link
Collaborator

@OHaimanov OHaimanov changed the title RANCHER-1247 folioCiQualityGates failing during parallel env provisioning [QG Part 3] RANCHER-1247 folioCiQualityGates failing during parallel env provisioning Mar 7, 2024
//TODO switch to regular job before merge
String createNamespaceFromBranchJob = '/folioRancher/tmpFolderForDraftPipelines/createNamespaceFromBranch-1247'
//TODO switch to regular job before merge
String deleteNamespaceJob = '/folioRancher/tmpFolderForDraftPipelines/deleteNamespace-1247'
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Are we considering moving pipeline paths (maybe to Constants) so they aren't written as strings in dependent pipelines?
Maybe some class or module to work with dependent pipelines.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeap, we have, it will be separate PR

string(name: 'S3_BUCKET', value: namespaceCreateParams.getS3Type()),
string(name: 'MEMBERS', value: namespaceCreateParams.getMembers()),
string(name: 'AGENT', value: namespaceCreateParams.getWorker())]
logger.debug(jobResult.dump())
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If there is some class or module where values will be cloned for invoked pipelines, we will remove a bunch of boilerplate code and the pipeline itself will be easier to read. Since we are transitioning towards re-invoked pipelines, it becomes important to unify their invocation.

Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we could discuss this option and create ticket for improvement

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
2 participants