I see the class javadoc for that class but how would I use that to actually
aggregate the junit tests to report in the build-flow plugin?
Is it also possible to discourage people in the documentation and yet leave
the workspace there so its possible?
On Fri, Aug 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, nicolas de loof
<nicolas.del...@gmail.com>wrote:
> I indeed removed workspace support especially to discourage such a "write
> some custom jenkins code using DSL" approach.
> build-flow is about orchestrating jobs, not creating custom plugins
>
> junit aggregator is using the original location for junit results, and
> dynamically aggregating. It doesn't copy to local project.
>
>
> 2013/8/30 John Russell <jjruss...@gmail.com>
>
>> Teilo, When did build flow stop having a workspace? I finally got this
>> to work by archiving all of the junit files from the downstream jobs onto
>> the master, running build-flow on the master, and directly copying the
>> files from the archive of the downstream build to build flow and running
>> the junit results post build step.
>>
>> So this won't work anymore? If there is no workspace how would any junit
>> result post build step work?
>>
>>
>> On Friday, August 30, 2013 4:14:04 AM UTC-4, teilo wrote:
>>>
>>> The BuildFlow doesn't use a workspace anymore[1] - so your workaround
>>> most likely won't work as you expect.
>>>
>>> I'm not convinced that this is a good thing as like you I would like to
>>> show test results in the main flow job - not have another job that is just
>>> aggregate & report.
>>>
>>> On Monday, 12 August 2013 20:17:54 UTC+1, John Russell wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Do you guys have any idea how to pull files, specifically test results,
>>>> from the jobs started in a build flow up to the build flow job itself so it
>>>> can be the one that presents all of the test results?
>>>>
>>>> I presume that if I can copy them from the slaves up to the workspace
>>>> of the build flow build that the post build step of processing the test
>>>> results will get them all. Any thoughts on how to get those files back
>>>> to the master?
>>>>
>>>> On Thursday, January 3, 2013 2:30:31 AM UTC-5, Nicolas De loof wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> sure, rescue handle whatever happens in gard block, that has no
>>>>> restriction on nested content
>>>>>
>>>>> 2013/1/3 Patrick van der Velde <petrikva...@gmail.com>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks for that suggestion. One question about the guard statement.
>>>>>> Can it handle multiple statements? i.e. is the following allowed?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> guard {
>>>>>> build("job1")
>>>>>> build("job2")
>>>>>> } rescue {
>>>>>> build("finaljob")
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> or even this
>>>>>>
>>>>>> guard {
>>>>>> parallel(
>>>>>> { build("job1a") },
>>>>>> { build("job2a") },
>>>>>> )
>>>>>>
>>>>>> parallel(
>>>>>> { build("job1b") },
>>>>>> { build("job2b") },
>>>>>> )
>>>>>> } rescue {
>>>>>> build("finaljob")
>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> My script looks a bit like that last one but when I tried putting a
>>>>>> guard clause around it I got the following error:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ERROR: Failed to run DSL Scriptgroovy.lang.**MissingMethodException
>>>>>> <http://stacktrace.jenkins-ci.org/search?query=groovy.lang.MissingMethodException>:
>>>>>> No signature of method:
>>>>>> com.cloudbees.plugins.flow.**FlowDelegate.rescue() is applicable for
>>>>>> argument types: (Script1$_run_closure1_**closure3) values:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Removing the guard clause made it work. So I'm guessing guard can
>>>>>> only handle 1 item?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Petrik
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 10:16 PM, nicolas de loof <
>>>>>> nicolas...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> use gard+rescue so you can execute a post-job even when some jobs
>>>>>>> are unstable
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 2013/1/2 Patrick <petrikva...@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Ok I'm going to have to amend this answer. My idea of having a
>>>>>>>> separate job at the end to gather the results would work if it wasn't
>>>>>>>> for
>>>>>>>> the fact that the build flow plugin kills the build as soon as one of
>>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> jobs fails. That means I only can get the results if the build works
>>>>>>>> which
>>>>>>>> is not what I want. I want the results gathering to always take place,
>>>>>>>> even
>>>>>>>> if the all the build jobs fail. Any way to achieve this?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Petrik
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, 2 January 2013 11:46:54 UTC+13, Patrick wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hi
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mmm ok, I guess I could create a separate job to gather all the
>>>>>>>>> test results. Thanks for the advice :)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Petrik
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> --
>> 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.
>>
>> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to a topic in the
> Google Groups "Jenkins Users" group.
> To unsubscribe from this topic, visit
> https://groups.google.com/d/topic/jenkinsci-users/MX29Ld8upCs/unsubscribe.
> To unsubscribe from this group and all its topics, send an email to
> jenkinsci-users+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
--
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.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
