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

add documentation for validate-downloads job #849

Closed
wants to merge 6 commits into from

Conversation

mhdawson
Copy link
Member

No description provided.

@mhdawson mhdawson mentioned this pull request Aug 24, 2017
richardlau

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@mhdawson
Copy link
Member Author

@nodejs/build any comments and if not can I get an approval so I can land.

refack

This comment was marked as off-topic.

joaocgreis

This comment was marked as off-topic.

refack

This comment was marked as off-topic.

@refack
Copy link
Contributor

refack commented Aug 29, 2017

@mhdawson I added my nit fixes as a [suggestion] commit. Obviously feel free to push it out.

@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Aug 30, 2017

I'll review properly later today, but as an initial thought I'd rather we didn't start having separate documentation of these jobs, as in my experience it just gets out of date.

I'd rather we document the script clearly with comments, and then have the parameters just be the arguments to the script. If the way the parameter names map to the script is clear (it's either an environment variable, or it's passed in directly as an argument to the script) then that should be self-documenting. We could then have a single file that has an overview of each of the jobs to document what we have (i.e. the first paragraph of this doc).

I'll try to go through this in the next couple of hours and come up with something concrete.

@gibfahn gibfahn self-assigned this Sep 2, 2017
@mhdawson
Copy link
Member Author

mhdawson commented Sep 8, 2017

@gibfahn waiting on your follow up input.

@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Sep 8, 2017

So I'd suggest having a single file jenkins/jobs.md with an entry for each job, and a link to the job. Then we document the job parameters in the job itself (otherwise we have to duplicate that info, people probably won't think to look here). I updated the job config to add some of the parameter info already.

jenkins/jobs.md:


# Jenkins Jobs

## [validate-downloads](https://ci.nodejs.org/view/All/job/validate-downloads/)

This job validates that the downloads on nodejs.org are good. It is scheduled to
be run nightly and can also be run manually after a release is made. **Note:**
there is delay between when releases are generated and when they will be
available on nodejs.org (up to 60 minutes) so releasers may have to wait a bit
be able to complete the validation.

If validation fails an email notification is sent to the
`release-validation-alert` email alias. If you would like to get these
notifications submit a PR to have your email added for that alias in
https://github.com/nodejs/email/blob/master/iojs.org/aliases.json.

This job needs to be updated each time a we roll over to a new Current
release.

@gibfahn gibfahn removed their assignment Sep 16, 2017
@refack
Copy link
Contributor

refack commented Oct 14, 2017

@gibfahn can land?

gdams

This comment was marked as off-topic.

Totally forgot to include this in the last commit.
@gibfahn
Copy link
Member

gibfahn commented Oct 16, 2017

Okay, pushed a commit to my branch that does what I suggested in earlier comments.

LGTM.

gibfahn

This comment was marked as off-topic.

mhdawson added a commit that referenced this pull request Oct 16, 2017
PR-URL: #849
Reviewed-By: Refael Ackermann <refack@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: JoãReis <reis@janeasystems.com>
Reviewed-By: Gibson Fahnestock <gibfahn@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: George Adams <george.adams@uk.ibm.com>
@mhdawson
Copy link
Member Author

Landed as aed300d

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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants