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 signing to worker, spark binaries and nuget packages #6

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 24, 2019

Conversation

safern
Copy link
Member

@safern safern commented Apr 24, 2019

Here is a example build:

https://dnceng.visualstudio.com/internal/_build/results?buildId=167505

For easier reviewing disable spaces in the diff setting

cc: @danmosemsft @eerhardt @rapoth @imback82

@safern safern merged commit c75f4b7 into master Apr 24, 2019
@safern safern deleted the AddSigning branch April 24, 2019 15:48
- Build
displayName: Build packages
pool:
name: NetCoreInternal-Int-Pool
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why not just run the whole build on NetCoreInternal-Int-Pool and collapse this into a single job? That way you don't have to publish the artifacts and then pull them down. It could be simpler to do it all in 1 job.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

That was the initial approach but the machines in NetCoreInternal-Int-Pool don't have Maven in it and we need Maven for the scala sources.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Just an FYI - that might be a good comment to have in the .yml file.

Also - can we fix NetCoreInternal-Int-Pool to have 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 talked to @chcosta yesterday and he recommended this approach, but yes I agree, maybe the NetCoreInternal-Int-Pool should have it. cc: @MattGal is this possible?

I'll add a comment in the meantime

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@safern the general guidance is to bootstrap anything in builds which can be done in a non-stateful-to-machine way; I'll do some reading on Maven and if it makes sense we can add it to these machines (though it will take a bit to roll out)

- task: NuGetCommand@2
inputs:
command: pack
packagesToPack: '$(Build.SourcesDirectory)\src\csharp\Microsoft.Spark.nuspec'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why aren't we using dotnet pack here?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, I see we weren't before. So maybe this is a question for @imback82 and @rapoth


In reply to: 278200318 [](ancestors = 278200318)

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

dotnet pack should be also fine. What will be the benefit over nuget in this case? Just curious.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is cross plat, you don't need to bootstrap nuget.exe when you already have dotnet, you can package a csproj, so no need to create nuspec.

Copy link
Member

@eerhardt eerhardt Apr 24, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've opened #36 for this. @imback82 - I've enumerated all the advantages I can think of in that issue.

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