OSGeo.org › OSGeo Software and Data Projects › MapGuide Open Source › MapGuide Internals

Update on builds infrastructure

6 messages

Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

Hi everyone,

After two days of trickery, I have successfully migrated the MapGuide Open Source build environment to VMware vSphere. I decided to do this for a couple of reasons:

VMware is easier to use, more manageable, has integrated high availability and integrated backup capability. I also have nearly three years of experience with VMware ESX technology. From my perspective, it is simply a better fit especially from a multi-platform (Windows/Linux) perspective.

In addition, I am planning to move my VMware virtualization stack to a colocation site. This should improve uptime and reliability of the build environment. It also gives the Project the ability to host additional infrastructure such as a code review tool.

I am going to spend some time working on the build environment over the next few days. The first task on my list is to integrate the installer into the build environment. I will likely ping the list a few times as I work through the process.

Jason - depending on your timelines and availability, I may be able to generate the second beta which was discussed at the PSC meeting last week. I should have something by end of next week if I don't hit too many snags.

Thanks,
Trevor

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

Jason Birch

Re: Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

I can get it done, but it may be better if I helped setting up an easier way
of pushing the official beta builds in the VM environment :)
IMO, unless we decide to get RFC60 into 2.1 B2, it's going into trunk and
being deferred to 2.2, and this was the main reason I've been holding back.
I am a bit worried about potential destabilization at this point, and my
preference would be to push RFC60 back. This is a great addition, and I'd
use it myself, but I don't like the risk.

If UV wants to maintain a sandbox branch of 2.1 that contains the RFC60 work
to allow him to easily pull up fixes from the 2.1 stream for his client, as
well as a sandbox branch of trunk for official integration at 2.2, I'd be
happy with this approach.

Jason

2009/9/18 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>

> Hi everyone,
>
> After two days of trickery, I have successfully migrated the MapGuide Open
> Source build environment to VMware vSphere. I decided to do this for a
> couple of reasons:
>
> VMware is easier to use, more manageable, has integrated high availability
> and integrated backup capability. I also have nearly three years of
> experience with VMware ESX technology. From my perspective, it is simply a
> better fit especially from a multi-platform (Windows/Linux) perspective.
>
> In addition, I am planning to move my VMware virtualization stack to a
> colocation site. This should improve uptime and reliability of the build
> environment. It also gives the Project the ability to host additional
> infrastructure such as a code review tool.
>
> I am going to spend some time working on the build environment over the
> next few days. The first task on my list is to integrate the installer into
> the build environment. I will likely ping the list a few times as I work
> through the process.
>
> Jason - depending on your timelines and availability, I may be able to
> generate the second beta which was discussed at the PSC meeting last week.
> I should have something by end of next week if I don't hit too many snags.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

zspitzer

Re: Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

I concur! lets get 2.1 out the door asap and wait on RFC 60

but can we consider making making a major point release for
when RFC60 is ready?

z

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

> I can get it done, but it may be better if I helped setting up an easier way
> of pushing the official beta builds in the VM environment :)
> IMO, unless we decide to get RFC60 into 2.1 B2, it's going into trunk and
> being deferred to 2.2, and this was the main reason I've been holding back.
> I am a bit worried about potential destabilization at this point, and my
> preference would be to push RFC60 back. This is a great addition, and I'd
> use it myself, but I don't like the risk.
>
> If UV wants to maintain a sandbox branch of 2.1 that contains the RFC60 work
> to allow him to easily pull up fixes from the 2.1 stream for his client, as
> well as a sandbox branch of trunk for official integration at 2.2, I'd be
> happy with this approach.
>
> Jason
>
> 2009/9/18 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>
>
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> After two days of trickery, I have successfully migrated the MapGuide Open
>> Source build environment to VMware vSphere. I decided to do this for a
>> couple of reasons:
>>
>> VMware is easier to use, more manageable, has integrated high availability
>> and integrated backup capability. I also have nearly three years of
>> experience with VMware ESX technology. From my perspective, it is simply a
>> better fit especially from a multi-platform (Windows/Linux) perspective.
>>
>> In addition, I am planning to move my VMware virtualization stack to a
>> colocation site. This should improve uptime and reliability of the build
>> environment. It also gives the Project the ability to host additional
>> infrastructure such as a code review tool.
>>
>> I am going to spend some time working on the build environment over the
>> next few days. The first task on my list is to integrate the installer into
>> the build environment. I will likely ping the list a few times as I work
>> through the process.
>>
>> Jason - depending on your timelines and availability, I may be able to
>> generate the second beta which was discussed at the PSC meeting last week.
>> I should have something by end of next week if I don't hit too many snags.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Trevor
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

Trevor Wekel

RE: Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

Hi Zac,

I think it would actually be a new minor release - version 2.2. Major release are for "huge impact" changes like implementing the Fusion Viewer front end.

According to the release process document we are supposed to do a couple of minor releases every year, spaced about 6 months apart. The would put the official MGOS 2.2 release date somewhere around February or March.

If we want to get really serious, we could include RFC 60 in trunk and start releasing 2.2 betas off of trunk before year end. This could also be of some benefit to Autodesk since the community will have early exposure to the code base and they may find defects which can be fixed before the release of MapGuide Enterprise.

If we use this approach, all of the current RFC work being done by Autodesk will get rolled into MapGuide Open Source 2.2. That's definitely a big bang...

And waiting three months for a new beta containing a whack of new features will definitely be a bonus for the community.

Of course, all of the would have to be discussed by the PSC and approved. And I guess we would have to determine whether or not we are releasing 32 bit and 64 bit versions of MapGuide Open Source. 32 bit should be straightforward. I can clone the existing 2.1 VM. 64 bit will significantly more work because we would need to set up a native 64 bit build environment. And I'm not sure how our existing install technology will behave in 64 bit.

Thanks,
Trevor

-----Original Message-----
From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
Sent: September 19, 2009 10:15 PM
To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Update on builds infrastructure

I concur! lets get 2.1 out the door asap and wait on RFC 60

but can we consider making making a major point release for
when RFC60 is ready?

z

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:

--
Zac Spitzer -
http://zacster.blogspot.com
+61 405 847 168
_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals

zspitzer

Re: Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

sorry, my bad, i thought 2.2 was a major point release :)

i've been using 2.1 beta for a while in prod now, with the RFC 60 changes
included and it's stable in my testing on the explore australia map base
which is pretty huge and it works great.

Couldn't we have RFC60 in 2.11, abstractly speaking it's just a bug fix and
just works out of the box, behaving in the manner which users expect.

z

On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 3:02 PM, Trevor Wekel
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Zac,
>
> I think it would actually be a new minor release - version 2.2. Major release are for "huge impact" changes like implementing the Fusion Viewer front end.
>
> According to the release process document we are supposed to do a couple of minor releases every year, spaced about 6 months apart. The would put the official MGOS 2.2 release date somewhere around February or March.
>
> If we want to get really serious, we could include RFC 60 in trunk and start releasing 2.2 betas off of trunk before year end. This could also be of some benefit to Autodesk since the community will have early exposure to the code base and they may find defects which can be fixed before the release of MapGuide Enterprise.
>
> If we use this approach, all of the current RFC work being done by Autodesk will get rolled into MapGuide Open Source 2.2. That's definitely a big bang...
>
> And waiting three months for a new beta containing a whack of new features will definitely be a bonus for the community.
>
> Of course, all of the would have to be discussed by the PSC and approved. And I guess we would have to determine whether or not we are releasing 32 bit and 64 bit versions of MapGuide Open Source. 32 bit should be straightforward. I can clone the existing 2.1 VM. 64 bit will significantly more work because we would need to set up a native 64 bit build environment. And I'm not sure how our existing install technology will behave in 64 bit.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:[hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
> Sent: September 19, 2009 10:15 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Update on builds infrastructure
>
> I concur! lets get 2.1 out the door asap and wait on RFC 60
>
> but can we consider making making a major point release for
> when RFC60 is ready?
>
> z
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:
>> I can get it done, but it may be better if I helped setting up an easier way
>> of pushing the official beta builds in the VM environment :)
>> IMO, unless we decide to get RFC60 into 2.1 B2, it's going into trunk and
>> being deferred to 2.2, and this was the main reason I've been holding back.
>> I am a bit worried about potential destabilization at this point, and my
>> preference would be to push RFC60 back. This is a great addition, and I'd
>> use it myself, but I don't like the risk.
>>
>> If UV wants to maintain a sandbox branch of 2.1 that contains the RFC60 work
>> to allow him to easily pull up fixes from the 2.1 stream for his client, as
>> well as a sandbox branch of trunk for official integration at 2.2, I'd be
>> happy with this approach.
>>
>> Jason
>>
>> 2009/9/18 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>
>>
>>> Hi everyone,
>>>
>>> After two days of trickery, I have successfully migrated the MapGuide Open
>>> Source build environment to VMware vSphere. I decided to do this for a
>>> couple of reasons:
>>>
>>> VMware is easier to use, more manageable, has integrated high availability
>>> and integrated backup capability. I also have nearly three years of
>>> experience with VMware ESX technology. From my perspective, it is simply a
>>> better fit especially from a multi-platform (Windows/Linux) perspective.
>>>
>>> In addition, I am planning to move my VMware virtualization stack to a
>>> colocation site. This should improve uptime and reliability of the build
>>> environment. It also gives the Project the ability to host additional
>>> infrastructure such as a code review tool.
>>>
>>> I am going to spend some time working on the build environment over the
>>> next few days. The first task on my list is to integrate the installer into
>>> the build environment. I will likely ping the list a few times as I work
>>> through the process.
>>>
>>> Jason - depending on your timelines and availability, I may be able to
>>> generate the second beta which was discussed at the PSC meeting last week.
>>> I should have something by end of next week if I don't hit too many snags.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Trevor
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>>> [hidden email]
>>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mapguide-internals mailing list
>> [hidden email]
>> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com
> +61 405 847 168
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

Jason Birch

Re: Update on builds infrastructure

Reply Threaded

In reply to this post by Trevor Wekel

WiX works just fine in 64bit, but we'll have to develop a separate installer
config so it's not trivial. Much of the existing stuff can be re-used for
the 64bit installer config though.
It's my secret hope that Helio's work is done on FDO soon and we can benefit
from some of his CMake goodness on MapGuide trunk and have a better answer
for Linux users by 2.2 time.

Jason

2009/9/19 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>

> Hi Zac,
>
> I think it would actually be a new minor release - version 2.2. Major
> release are for "huge impact" changes like implementing the Fusion Viewer
> front end.
>
> According to the release process document we are supposed to do a couple of
> minor releases every year, spaced about 6 months apart. The would put the
> official MGOS 2.2 release date somewhere around February or March.
>
> If we want to get really serious, we could include RFC 60 in trunk and
> start releasing 2.2 betas off of trunk before year end. This could also be
> of some benefit to Autodesk since the community will have early exposure to
> the code base and they may find defects which can be fixed before the
> release of MapGuide Enterprise.
>
> If we use this approach, all of the current RFC work being done by Autodesk
> will get rolled into MapGuide Open Source 2.2. That's definitely a big
> bang...
>
> And waiting three months for a new beta containing a whack of new features
> will definitely be a bonus for the community.
>
> Of course, all of the would have to be discussed by the PSC and approved.
> And I guess we would have to determine whether or not we are releasing 32
> bit and 64 bit versions of MapGuide Open Source. 32 bit should be
> straightforward. I can clone the existing 2.1 VM. 64 bit will
> significantly more work because we would need to set up a native 64 bit
> build environment. And I'm not sure how our existing install technology
> will behave in 64 bit.
>
> Thanks,
> Trevor
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [hidden email] [mailto:
> [hidden email]] On Behalf Of Zac Spitzer
> Sent: September 19, 2009 10:15 PM
> To: MapGuide Internals Mail List
> Subject: Re: [mapguide-internals] Update on builds infrastructure
>
> I concur! lets get 2.1 out the door asap and wait on RFC 60
>
> but can we consider making making a major point release for
> when RFC60 is ready?
>
> z
>
> On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 7:39 AM, Jason Birch <[hidden email]> wrote:
> > I can get it done, but it may be better if I helped setting up an easier
> way
> > of pushing the official beta builds in the VM environment :)
> > IMO, unless we decide to get RFC60 into 2.1 B2, it's going into trunk and
> > being deferred to 2.2, and this was the main reason I've been holding
> back.
> > I am a bit worried about potential destabilization at this point, and my
> > preference would be to push RFC60 back. This is a great addition, and
> I'd
> > use it myself, but I don't like the risk.
> >
> > If UV wants to maintain a sandbox branch of 2.1 that contains the RFC60
> work
> > to allow him to easily pull up fixes from the 2.1 stream for his client,
> as
> > well as a sandbox branch of trunk for official integration at 2.2, I'd be
> > happy with this approach.
> >
> > Jason
> >
> > 2009/9/18 Trevor Wekel <[hidden email]>
> >
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> After two days of trickery, I have successfully migrated the MapGuide
> Open
> >> Source build environment to VMware vSphere. I decided to do this for a
> >> couple of reasons:
> >>
> >> VMware is easier to use, more manageable, has integrated high
> availability
> >> and integrated backup capability. I also have nearly three years of
> >> experience with VMware ESX technology. From my perspective, it is
> simply a
> >> better fit especially from a multi-platform (Windows/Linux) perspective.
> >>
> >> In addition, I am planning to move my VMware virtualization stack to a
> >> colocation site. This should improve uptime and reliability of the
> build
> >> environment. It also gives the Project the ability to host additional
> >> infrastructure such as a code review tool.
> >>
> >> I am going to spend some time working on the build environment over the
> >> next few days. The first task on my list is to integrate the installer
> into
> >> the build environment. I will likely ping the list a few times as I
> work
> >> through the process.
> >>
> >> Jason - depending on your timelines and availability, I may be able to
> >> generate the second beta which was discussed at the PSC meeting last
> week.
> >> I should have something by end of next week if I don't hit too many
> snags.
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Trevor
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> mapguide-internals mailing list
> >> [hidden email]
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > mapguide-internals mailing list
> > [hidden email]
> > http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Zac Spitzer -
> http://zacster.blogspot.com
> +61 405 847 168
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mapguide-internals mailing list
> [hidden email]
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals
>

_______________________________________________
mapguide-internals mailing list
[hidden email]
http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/mapguide-internals