Skip to content

feat: deploy gubbins images #527

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

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

aldbr
Copy link
Contributor

@aldbr aldbr commented May 9, 2025

Closes #349

I could potentially create a reusable workflow to avoid duplicating some code between deployment.yaml and extension.yaml but this would also add some complexity to extension.yaml. As it can act as an example of CI, I feel like it should stay clear and simple and that we can afford that small duplication (I've tried to minimize it). Please let me know if you have a different opinion.

Here I export both gubbins/client and services, but I think we would just need to use gubbins/services.

Unless you disagree, or if you have a better plan, I will make a quick test on my repo first, and if everything goes well I undraft the PR.

@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch 4 times, most recently from 7cab612 to 0b35072 Compare May 12, 2025 15:26
@aldbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

aldbr commented May 12, 2025

So I applied b830754 to test the content of the PR on my fork.

It seems to work:

Note: extensions.yaml cannot pass this CI because it requires an existing gubbins/services:dev image, which does not exist at the moment.

@aldbr aldbr marked this pull request as ready for review May 12, 2025 15:28
@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch 5 times, most recently from afd00ac to 714db7c Compare May 22, 2025 11:06
@aldbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

aldbr commented May 22, 2025

I've applied the latest changes, and made things a bit differently in main.yaml: instead of relying on a potential dev image that would be stored in the registry (diracx-services:dev exists but not gubbins-services:dev), I build dev from scratch in the CI for both extensions.

It allows testing potential changes that could occur in the Dockerfiles (diracx and gubbins)

@aldbr aldbr marked this pull request as draft May 27, 2025 12:32
@aldbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

aldbr commented May 27, 2025

Looks like I don't have enough space to run minio as I am now loading the diracx docker image both locally and in kind:
https://github.com/DIRACGrid/diracx/actions/runs/15189075216/job/42716849956#step:13:1171

I am trying to add a prune-loaded-images option to run_demo.sh to remove the local image once loaded in kind, let's see how it goes 🤞

@aldbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

aldbr commented May 27, 2025

I've applied DIRACGrid/diracx-charts#158 to this PR, and it seems to solve the issue.
Once merged - if you validate the solution - I will remove my workaround and undraft this PR.

@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch 2 times, most recently from 4b1d400 to bd0f6e3 Compare May 27, 2025 13:43
@aldbr
Copy link
Contributor Author

aldbr commented May 27, 2025

Should we move the content of https://github.com/DIRACGrid/diracx-charts/blob/master/demo/ci_values.yaml in ./diracx_values.yaml and ./extensions/gubbins_values.yaml (or in ./ci_values.yaml)?

@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch from bd0f6e3 to a2f221d Compare July 17, 2025 12:04
@aldbr aldbr marked this pull request as ready for review July 17, 2025 12:04
@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch from a2f221d to 5d195dd Compare July 17, 2025 12:08
@aldbr aldbr force-pushed the main_FEAT_deploy-gubbins branch from 5d195dd to 923ba11 Compare July 17, 2025 15:41
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.

Publish gubbins:dev
1 participant