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

New version 2.1.1 for the bosh-setup template #2652

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
Nov 8, 2016

Conversation

bingosummer
Copy link
Member

Changelog

  • Add a retry logic for uploading stemcell and release
  • Upgrade to CustomScript 2.0
  • Some other minor improvements

"typeHandlerVersion": "1.4",
"publisher": "Microsoft.Azure.Extensions",
"type": "CustomScript",
"typeHandlerVersion": "2.0",
"settings": {
"fileUris": "[variables('filesToDownload')]"
},
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@ahmetalpbalkan
CustomScript is upgraded to 2.0 in this commit.

echo "Successfully."
break
else
let retry=retry+1
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

maybe add a log here as well echo Retrying?

echo "Operation: $1, Retry #${retry}"
eval $1
if [ $? -eq 0 ]; then
echo "Successfully."
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Successful sounds a bit better?

azure storage blob upload manifests/single-vm-cf.yml ${container_name} ${template_version}/manifests/single-vm-cf.yml
azure storage blob upload manifests/multiple-vm-cf.yml ${container_name} ${template_version}/manifests/multiple-vm-cf.yml
directories="scripts manifests"
for directory in $directories
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

these two scripts look like they're written by different people :) I guess mostly because do statements are on a separate line, unlike retry.sh.

@ahmetb
Copy link
Contributor

ahmetb commented Oct 21, 2016

Thanks!

@bingosummer
Copy link
Member Author

bingosummer commented Oct 21, 2016

@ahmetalpbalkan
This PR is closed by myself for test. Now reopen it.
It has not been merged yet.

@bingosummer
Copy link
Member Author

@bmoore-msft
Could you please have a review on this PR? Thanks in advance.

@@ -113,10 +113,10 @@

"baseUriAzureCloud": "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Azure/azure-quickstart-templates/master/bosh-setup/",
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@bmoore-msft
From my understanding, the BP for the artifacts are mainly for the template developers. Because for end users, mostly they will use the artifacts we provide, and won't change them. Specially, for the bosh-setup template, the purpose is POC of Cloud Foundry deployment on Azure. And too many parameters may confuse users. So we try to make it simple.

When our team are developing and testing the template, we just change the hardcoding URL to the private location. I think, this way works well.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@bmoore-msft
Do you have any updates? Does my understanding make sense? Thanks for your kindly reviewing.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We want to have templates that work well for developers as well as end-users, showing how templates can be flexible and used across clouds with "standard" tools and scripts. You can default the parameter values as described in the bp guide and portal users won't need to worry about it.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand I can give the default value to the parameter. But from our point of view, we don't want to expose the baseUriAzureCloud as a parameter to users because most end-users don't need to change the url.
If this best practice is not a MUST, could you please merge the PR at this point? And we can investigate whether we should expose it or not. If users ask for it, we can expose it in future.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is a must we want a consistent staging experience - we've updated BP and PR templates to help with messaging.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You mentioned the templates are used across clouds with "standard" tools and scripts. What are the tools? From our understanding, we only need to make sure Azure Portal, CLI and Powershell can deploy the template successfully.
We still think this bp is not applicable to the bosh-setup template because end users never need to change the baseUriAzureCloud as a parameter.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We agree there are a set of users that don't need to change the parameter value - that's why the BP details an approach that provides a default value for those users. That same approach also works for other consumers of the repo...

@bingosummer
Copy link
Member Author

bingosummer commented Nov 1, 2016

@singhkays Any concerns or updates?

@bmoore-msft bmoore-msft self-assigned this Nov 1, 2016
@bingosummer bingosummer closed this Nov 7, 2016
@bingosummer bingosummer reopened this Nov 8, 2016
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.

4 participants