Navigation

    Inedo Community Forums

    Forums

    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular
    • Users
    • Groups
    1. Home
    2. it_9582
    3. Topics
    I
    • Profile
    • Following
    • Followers
    • Topics
    • Posts
    • Best
    • Groups

    Topics created by it_9582

    • I

      Promote Package if Build is promoted to new stage
      Support • • it_9582  

      2
      0
      Votes
      2
      Posts
      8
      Views

      stevedennis

      Hi @it_9582, First and foremost, we don't recommend the "package promotion" feature as a means to indicate which "stage" (i.e. tested quality) a package is in relative to a CI/CD pipeline. Instead, repackaging should be used: https://docs.inedo.com/docs/proget/packages/repackaging Having multiple feeds is fine; we do that for Products and PreReleaseProducts on proget.inedo.com, but that's to make it "harder" for someone to accidently use a prerelease version. Otherwise, you can just use one feed and have retention policies cleanup the "-ci" builds. As for having the "build promotion" feature in ProGet be used as a workflow engine (i.e. to trigger actions upon promotion), I don't think we would consider that. At the most, we would do a webhook of sorts... though it doesn't make a ton of sense to be honest. The reason is that ProGet isn't intended as the "source of truth" for build status - the idea is that you would have something like a pipeline in BuildMaster) update the statuses in ProGet. The main benefit to having this status in ProGet is retention of builds/SBOMs. Hope that helps, Steve
    • I

      Conan License detection issue
      Support • • it_9582  

      2
      0
      Votes
      2
      Posts
      8
      Views

      atripp

      Hi @it_9582 , This is a known issue / UI quirk with Conan packages, and hopefully should only impact that one page in the UI. To be honest I don't quite get the issue, but it has something to do with the fact that a Conan package is actually "set of packages that share a name and version". Each package in the set can define its own license file. The particular page was never really designed for "package sets" so the display is a little weird. It's a nontrivial effort to fix and would obviously impact all other package types, so it's not a priority at the moment. We would love to redo the UI at some point, s I think it'd mkae sense to do then. Thanks, Alana
    • I

      Universal Package has no license field in metadata
      Support • • it_9582  

      3
      0
      Votes
      3
      Posts
      12
      Views

      I

      Hi @stevedennis, thanks for your reply, it would be really nice if this feature could be implemented. We would chat about this with our point of contact. Thanks, Florian
    • 1 / 1