administrators group

atripp

@forbzie22_0253 yes it's supported, but please note we are moving away from SQL Server to PostgreSQL, so you should consider migrating (Admin > Database)

atripp

Hi @a.sieger ,

Please note that we do not recommend an external PostgreSQL database. It performs slower, costs more to maintain, has a higher chance of outages, and tends to cause support headaches down the line. The database primarily stores package metadata and application configuration, doesn't take up much disk space, and it's not the business data that your DBAs would own.

That being said if you really insist on using one, then please refer to the Database Connection String section on the page you linked.

For the non-embedded PostgreSQL database backend, you will need to specify a «inedo-product»_POSTGRES_CONNECTION_STRING environment variable instead.

So you need to use PROGET__POSTGRES_CONNECTION_STRING

Thanks,
Alana

atripp

Hi @daniel.mccoy_4395 ,

Actually, developer experience is a big reason we don't recommend using Download Blocking. A 400 error provides no real context. Developers can see something is wrong, but not how serious it is or what to do next.

First and foremost, an unlisted package should not be noncompliant. An author may decide to unlist their package for any number of reasons, including simply not wanting too many versions to show up in a list.

This would mean that, all of a sudden, a build deployed to production can suddenly be considered as noncompliant just because an open source author arbitrarily flipped a switch on NuGet.org. That's not to say you should ignore the unlisted flag, but you should definitely not put it at the same categorization as a GPL3 license or severe vulnerability.

"Compliant with Warning" could be a more appropriate status here, but keep in mind that developers swill naturally upgrade dependencies as they do platform updates, so it may not even be worth worrying about. Especially if it leads to constant warnings -- in that case, warnings become meaningless.

Noncompliant packages should be rare for the same reason. If noncompliant can be determined by an OSS author's whims, then it really caries no meaning and no one (especially your developers) will understand/appreciate what it means.

As for the workflow to use, we recommend running pgutil builds scan when that pull request is run. That will not only put the build in ProGet, but it will produce a text report with warnings or noncompliant packages. A ProGet login is not required.

If there are Noncomplaint packages or warnings, the developer can then comment on the PR why it's nothing to worry about. If it's always the same package/issue ("we cannot upgrade from this 5-year old library and replacing it would be a substantial effort"), then you can formalize that as an exemption.

The advantage to this workflow is that, if a deployed build later becomes noncomplaint (typically due to a vulnerability), then you can decide how and when to address it. The wrong time to address noncomplaint packages is "the next time a developer happens to open this project".

Overall, what you want to avoid is having developers load a project for what should be a trivial change and then have to upgrade dependencies because it produces pointless warnings/errors. That will just create a "constant upgrade" mentality. That leads to constant regressions and constant headaches for testers or end-users, who have to deal with strange and unexpected errors from library upgrades.

Hope that helps,

Alana

stevedennis

Hi @daniel.mccoy_4395 ,

This is how unlisted packages are designed to work; it's just a flag in the metadata, and clients will treat it however they'd like. Visual Studio hides them but lets you download them, ProGet shows them with a little "unlisted" icon.

As for the download error, the 400 sounds like you've configured "download blocking" perhaps? Check the feed's policy settings.

We generally don't recommend configuring download blocking, but using pgutil builds scan instead; see https://guides.inedo.com/vulnerability-management/containment/

Hope that helps,

Steve

atripp

Hi @rcpa0,

It's hard to say, but maybe it has something to do with how the package file / archive was created.

Can you share the file or a reproduction case?

Thanks,
Alana

atripp

Hi @brandon_owensby_2976 ,

Thanks for clarifying; it got a little distracting with the desire to have PR cleanups and specialized variables! We also see a lot of anti-patterns in Git repositories, such as using PRs for workflows, because that's how open source projects tend to work.

Anyway, it sounds like you figured it the first part, which is to set the monitor to just create a build with a specific pipeline (e.g. "Feature Branch" pipeline).

The next step, just use a retention policy that targets builds that have completed the pipeline. For example:

https://docs.inedo.com/docs/buildmaster/builds-continuous-integration/buildmaster-ci-git-workflows/buildmaster-git-feature-branches#cleaning-up-feature-branch-builds-with-retention-rules

atripp

Hi @brandon_owensby_2976 ,

Here is the standard practice / pattern that we support for Feature Branches:

The idea is that developers start by creating a well-named feature branch (i.e. following a strict naming standard), adding commits to it, testing it, and then finally submitting a pull request for it. See our Feature Branches article to learn more about this workflow, including how retention rules can be configured.

In other words, the Pull Request comes only once the branch is ready (validated) for merging, and BuildMaster is submitting (or facilitating) that request. We take the term literally ("a request to pull the changes from the branch into into the master"):

The branch owner is responsible for creating a "mergeable branch" and submitting that for review; a KPI here is is submitting timely/acceptable requests
The master owner is responsible for promptly reviewing the request, then merging, closing, and deleting the branch; a KPI here is timely review/merging

In this workflow, there is no need for "commit verification" before submitting a PR. That's the responsibility of the branch owner, and they will have already done that before submitting.

I am aware that others do not use Git repositories this way, but our tooling is a generally opinionated. For example, we consider "pull requests as a backlog" as an anti-pattern for several reasons, but mostly that it's an inappropriate tool for work item management and lacks any semblance of prioritization and related feature. Issue tracking is appropriate for backlog tracking. So thaht's why there's not first-class support for it in BuildMaster.

All this said, I don't think the "Feature Branch" workflow is what you're describing. I don't quite understand it, but long story short... if it doesn't really fit into one of our use cases, so it's isn't something that's going to be easy to configure in the software - and you'll likely need to start customizing with your own Extension.

Instead, we recommend to just adjust the workflow.

Thanks,
Alana

atripp

Hi @Nils-Nilsson ,

We'll implement something like Scenario B, which mirrors how the UI handles it and is the easiest to implement:

pgutil feeds create --name=myfeed --type=NuGet --group=mygroup

We'll also target this for July 24th's release, and ship via PG-3338.

Thanks,
Alana

atripp

Hi @Nils-Nilsson,

Sorry on the slow response; we finally got the chance now to prioritize some roadmap items.

In any case, this will be implemented as PG-3337 in an upcoming maintenance release (targeting July 24).

Thanks,
Alana

apxltd

Hi @xabur ,

Thanks for sharing the additional information! I've been meaning to research this more in depth, but just ran out of time.

I can't quite seem to figure out what Open VSX is exactly. So far as I can tell, it's like an alternative the Visual Studio Gallery. Meaning, you plug in https://open-vsx.org/ in VS Code, and then all the requests go through their service instead of the official gallery?

If that's the case, what's the use case? They appear to have all the same extensions, so this just feels like one of those "GooglePlay store alternatives" on Android... except there's no account/registration/etc required with the Visual Studio Gallery. Right?

Open VSX clearly seems to be popular, I just don't understand why.

In any case, if a well-supported project "reverse engineered" the official gallery and then made an alternative, that kinda paves the path for us. We don't want to be the first or only game in town, when it comes to supporting feed types.

Thanks,
Alex

administrators

Posts

Member List