For situations where the user launches a distro comparison update
process and then shortly afterwards realises it is operating with the
wrong configuration (or is otherwise broken) and is going to take a long
time to finish, add a button to the task page to stop the task. This was
tricky to get working, since the default behaviour of Celery's revoke()
would either terminate both the Celery task process along with the update
process (leaving us with no log saved to the database) or worse not even
kill the update process, depending on the signal sent. To avoid this,
send SIGUSR2, trap it in the task process and kill the child process,
returning gracefully. To make that possible I had to rewrite runcmd() to
use subprocess.Popen() instead of subprocess.check_call() as otherwise
we can't get the child's PID.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If a distro comparison update task fails (returning a non-zero value to
indicate as such) we were not able to see this easily from the frontend.
Show success/failure in the form of a label on the task page and general
update list/detail, and if the task fails while we're watching then make
the progress bar go red as well. Also make a distinction between the
process failing (retcode > 0) and being terminated (retcode < 0, e.g.
process was killed).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Provide a mechanism for distro comparison update tasks to display
progress. In practice this means the update command needs to write the
progress percentage to a file and then the log view (which is polled by
the frontend) reads this file. Originally I was going to use a FIFO for
this but that turned out to be a but unreliable; I also tried to use
Celery's state mechanism to pass it back but I simply could not get it
to work. The file-based mechanism is good enough though.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We were refreshing the page constantly in order to show output while
a task was running, which basically worked but is horrible. Instead,
write the task output to a file and then use AJAX calls to request
whatever output has been written to the file since the last call
and call this roughly every second. Put the output in a scrollable <pre>
element instead of making it the length of the page, and auto-scroll
to the end (unless the user grabs the scrollbar and pulls it upwards -
it may not be immediately obvious that you can do this if there is a lot
of output since you have to pull it up when the scrolling animation is
not running, but it is possible).
An alternative would be to have used some kind of long-lived HTTP
session or a websocket, but those come with their own set of problems
so I elected to use this much simpler method.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If the layer has an actual_branch set, then show it underneath the URL
on the layer detail page so that the reader knows which branch they need
to check out to see what the index shows.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
In a bunch of places we needed to get the branch we were supposed to
be checking out (which is actual_branch if that is set, otherwise the
normal branch name). Add a function to do that.
Additionally, instead of showing the normal branch name next to the
"last update" date, use the result of this new function.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
At the moment the only way to get to the index is to manually type in
the URL, which is a little inconvenent. Add a link to the Tools
drop-down (visible only for users with admin access) that will take you
to it for convenience.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Use a more modern version of Bootstrap and take the opportunity to
upgrade jQuery to the latest version at the same time. This provides
better browser compatibility, moves to MIT license, allows us to make
the site more responsive for different devices in future, and provides
theming capabilities for custom installs among other improvements.
(I chose to upgrade to v3 for now rather than straight to v4 as it was
easier to do this gradually.)
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We were missing some import statements here, so clearly I didn't test
this as I thought I had.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Now the logic is:
Use options.layer_type if specified, and guess if not. Default to 'M'.
Note choices=['A', 'B', 'S', 'D', 'M', ''], the '' is for default='', we can't
use default='M' here, otherwise we don't know whether the 'M' is specified by
user or is the default value, we don't guess if it is specified by user,
otherwise, guess.
Signed-off-by: Robert Yang <liezhi.yang@windriver.com>
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If you're creating a new release then you will need to create milestones
within it, so add in-line forms for these. Unfortunately there's no
capability yet to automatically split up the release into n milestones
(or perhaps copy milestones from a previous release), that will have to
wait until later - for now this makes things a little easier.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
In the current RRS we should expect that more than one recipe with the
same PN can exist in a layer - in fact it is common to have this (i.e.
multiple versions of the same recipe). Use the filename to match the
recipe record instead. At the same time, fix the exception handling.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If there is no release or milestone covering the current date, show an
error message at the top of the recipes list page to alert the user that
they can't view current data (since this is a common cause of not being
able to see that which may not be immediately apparent).
Additionally, show a warning within rrs_upgrade_history when this
happens.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If a release has no milestones, we shouldn't be selecting it as the
default to be linked to in the maintenance plan drop-down, so filter
those out.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If a maintenance plan has no per-recipe maintainers then we don't show
the maintainer filtering drop-down, but we still had javascript code
that unconditionally tried to access it and of course that failed if it
wasn't there. Disable that as well without per-recipe maintainers.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
In the case of dry-run a couple of the scripts were breaking out after
one layerbranch had been processed due to the code structure. Handle the
exception within the block for the layerbranch to avoid this.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
I already changed the main layer detail page in
3adddf6a25 to show newlines, but forgot to
do the same in the review detail until now.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If a user doesn't have publish rights and the type of the layer isn't
already "Base" then disallow selecting the Base layer type. Some
submitters are selecting this type for their own layers, but it's pretty
much reserved for openembedded-core and meta-oe (so that they appear at
the top of the layer list).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We do not want to be prompting the user for a password during layer
updates or upstream checks, e.g. in the case where a repo requires
authentication, or on github where any fetch of a nonexistent repo
apparently triggers authentication.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We can always deploy these files since the default versions have all the
settings commented out - save proxy users from needing to uncomment
these (it's annoying if you miss doing so).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
During debugging a parsing issue, we don't really want to continue if a
parsing error occurs, and in that situation I usually end up using
Ctrl+C to exit early. Add an option to exit immediately upon error to
avoid having to do that.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We don't want to see the navbar on this page because otherwise it lets
you select branches and click on Stats etc. which doesn't make any sense
in this context.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
We were using the main badge class as a selector here to show the recipe
or maintainer count, and that meant that it also showed up at the top
next to the login button if there were some layers to review. Use a
proper id to stop that from happening.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
When showing the error/warning counts for update records we need to
include any errors/warnings that are shown only in the main update log,
so we need to adjust how these are collected. Use a function rather than
pure aggregation to give a bit more control, and a {% with ... %} block
in the template to avoid the functions being called more than necessary.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If an exception occurred during the update then we were managing to save
the update record, but we did not include the exception traceback in the
log for the update. Catch the exception and log it which ensures it gets
captured in the update record and still gets printed as well.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Make layerupdate collection slightly more reliable and make it easier
to see when updates have actually been captured:
* Split layerbranch into separate layer and branch fields, since there
may not be a layerbranch in existence but we might want to log an
error relating to the branch and layer.
* Show all layerupdates on the update detail page, not just those with
log messages
* Record before and after revisions and show these in the update detail
and layerupdate detail (with links)
* Record return code of update_layer process
* Highlight layer updates with a non-zero return code, errors or
warnings in the output on the update detail page
* Show duration on the layerupdate detail page
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
When an exception occurs during the main part of update_layer, we were
catching and printing it but that's not enough - we need to do the
following as well:
* Use logger.error() to print the exception information, so that it gets
logged and highlighted as an error in the layer update
* Exit with a non-zero return code so that update.py knows it has failed
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If for some reason update_layer.py does not print out the values we
expect then we shouldn't be throwing a traceback, we should be handling
it gracefully - i.e., print an error and then move on to the next layer.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
On the recipe detail page we provide a link to the actual recipe file
for reference purposes. However, for recipes that include a common .inc
file, many of the definitions of variable values will be inside the
.inc, therefore if you just look at the recipe you won't see the full
picture. Of course you can just go up to the parent directory in the
repository web interface, but for convenience's sake add links to any
files that are included/required by the recipe that are adjacent to
the recipe itself. (We already have the data in the form of the
RecipeFileDependency records that are intended to ensure we know when
the recipe needs to be updated if one of the files it includes changes).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Specifying the covering recipe in the comparison recipe detail page was
always a bit awkward - you could only type the name, if you wanted to
actually find a recipe or look up the currently selected one's details
then you had to open another browser tab/window. To fix this, replace
the form on the comparison recipe detail page with a side-by-side
display of the covering recipe's information, along with a button that
lets you search and then select the covering recipe and at the same time
enter comments or set any of the other cover fields.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If we're collecting this useful info we should really display it. Try to
make the link clickable if possible.
At the same time, add the layerbranch to the list display for Source
objects in the admin site.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add a script to fetch package sources from Fedora's Pagure
infrastructure site at https://src.fedoraproject.org/, based upon
github-fetch.py (I broke out the internal fetch function with the intent
to share it with that other script, however I didn't in the end as I
wanted the scripts to remain independent).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add a script to fetch/update all repositories within a GitHub
organisation. Note that to run this you will need an access token, which
you can create by going to GitHub and then
Settings -> Developer Settings -> Personal access tokens.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Comparison updates might involve some custom fetch process, so provide a
mechanism to register these via settings.py on a per-branch basis. If
an update command is defined for a branch and the logged-in user has the
new "update_comparison_branch" permission, an "Update" button will show
up on the recipes page for the comparison branch for authenticated
users that will trigger the command in the background (as a celery job)
and then show a page that displays the status. The status isn't shown in
real-time since that requires quite a lot of plumbing, but the page at
least auto-refreshes.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Make it clearer what this field is for (it should be set for every
comparison layer, so that they don't show up in places they shouldn't).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
If other distro comparison package(s) exist for a recipe being shown in
the RRS recipe detail page, link to the page for each package as well as
any extra URLs.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add a structure that lets you define a template URL per layer to be
shown per comparison recipe. For example, you could use this to define a
URL template to link to the upstream summary page for the package (e.g.
Fedora's page for the acl package is at
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/acl, so you would use
https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/%pn% as the template and then
this would be shown for every package).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add the ability to export the comparison search results to CSV format in
order to allow importing the data into external tools.
Note: I implemented this in a different way than the earlier recipe CSV
export, i.e. it uses a template to render the CSV instead of a
function-based view with the Python csv module - the reason for this is
we can reuse the same view as we use for producing the search, with all
of the flexibility that gives us.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
When doing the reversed query it's often desirable to exclude recipes
by inherited class, for example those that inherit the packagegroup,
image and meta classes as they don't actually build anything and thus
aren't going to match up with anything in the other distribution.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Provide a lazy-loaded popup for selecting layers to include in the query
instead of having it as a simple drop-down, so you can select more than
one layer.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Enable "reversing" the comparison, so you can see which recipes on the
OE side match up (or don't) with the other distro. The filtering for
this is a bit awkward, since we don't have an actual foreign key for the
link, hence the hairiness of the code.
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add support for importing package information extracted from a running
Debian system (i.e. from the output of apt-cache show "*").
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
Add a flag that can be set and searched for to indicate that we need to
take care of importing a package or a patch applied by a package.
Ideally the comments would elaborate on what's needed (if it's not
obvious from the cover status).
Signed-off-by: Paul Eggleton <paul.eggleton@linux.intel.com>
