Skip to content

new service integration library #115

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

Merged
merged 13 commits into from
Jul 31, 2025

Conversation

JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez commented Aug 28, 2024

see issue

Moved to ci-service-integration-library. Rework of .osparc, Makefile, and file structure was needed.

Seems to work well; dummy project created with it is able to run "make build" without errors.

closes #114

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez self-assigned this Aug 28, 2024
@JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Dear @pcrespov , sorry for the lack of context. This is the main PR, which addresses the change of tooling regarding service integration (see issue ). The other one (make "make build" is secondary and work-in-progress).

Regarding the elimination of bin/*, I did so imitating the structured of the more up-to-date cookiecutter of Jupyterlab services, which already uses ci-service-integration-library instead of the old service-integration. @GitHK insisted that we should perform that change - please add your comments.

@pcrespov
Copy link
Member

pcrespov commented Sep 2, 2024

Dear @pcrespov , sorry for the lack of context. This is the main PR, which addresses the change of tooling regarding service integration (see issue ). The other one (make "make build" is secondary and work-in-progress).

Regarding the elimination of bin/*, I did so imitating the structured of the more up-to-date cookiecutter of Jupyterlab services, which already uses ci-service-integration-library instead of the old service-integration. @GitHK insisted that we should perform that change - please add your comments.

Yes, I think here we need to align since there is some misunderstanding

@JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi Pedro, I agree. Let's discuss with @GitHK also. I am busy with other tasks at the moment and this isnt urgent, thus I propose we discuss about this in a few days. Best, Javier.

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez dismissed pcrespov’s stale review March 7, 2025 12:44

no longer using ooil file

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez requested a review from pcrespov March 7, 2025 12:44
Copy link
Member

@pcrespov pcrespov Mar 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@JavierGOrdonnez no longer using ooil file

@JavierGOrdonnez removing the ooil file may disrupt other users who rely on the contents of the bin directory. Consider:

  1. Maintain a Personal Fork: Customize and manage your own repository fork to suit your specific needs.
  2. Add a Cookiecutter Option: Introduce an option in the Cookiecutter template to exclude executable helpers, using a post-hook to remove the Makefile and bin/* files when they are unnecessary.

These approaches allow customization without affecting other users.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@pcrespov I have a question. if he replaces the ooil file with the one form the dockerimage there shouldn't be any difference, right?

@JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor Author

@pcrespov @GitHK Ready for review. Updated based on current state of cookiecutter-jupyter and jupyter-pysonic (updated last week by @GitHK ). Uses latest version of ci-service-integration-library (up to now using service-integration, see #114).

Tested to craft Lucia's new "pymorphosonic" service, and everything seems to be working fine.

Copy link
Member

@pcrespov pcrespov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Please check #115 (comment)

Copy link
Contributor

@GitHK GitHK left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please ask again for a review when all issues have been sorted out. Thanks

@JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor Author

@GitHK @pcrespov remembered that this was still hanging, and would be useful to have it ready for the Codeathon

closes #114

NB: Pedro, this is not to suit any particular workflow of mine; rather, it is a necessary fix, as it has been found multiple times (Codeathon 2024, @lmoyasans when developing https://git.speag.com/moyasans/pymorphosonic) that the cookiecutter as it currently stands produces workflows that fail upon build. This is a fix to that situation using the updated tooling from @GitHK .

Copy link
Contributor

@GitHK GitHK left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

at least please pin these

JavierGOrdonnez and others added 2 commits July 31, 2025 13:29
Co-authored-by: Andrei Neagu <5694077+GitHK@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Andrei Neagu <5694077+GitHK@users.noreply.github.com>
Copy link
Contributor Author

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ooil commands still present

- name: ooil version
uses: docker://itisfoundation/ci-service-integration-library:v2.1.25
with:
args: ooil --version
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@GitHK ooil still shows up in the "check-image.yml" workflows - but I dont see that generating any issues in the GitHub Actions. Please verify this makes sense.

@docker run --rm -v $(PWD):/${DOCKER_IMAGE_NAME} \
-u $(shell id -u):$(shell id -g) \
itisfoundation/ci-service-integration-library:v2.1.25\
sh -c "cd /${DOCKER_IMAGE_NAME} && ooil compose"
Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ooil also shows up here

@JavierGOrdonnez
Copy link
Contributor Author

NB: the JupyterLab CookieCutter is already converted to the "new" ci-service-integration-tool (simply pinned to an older version, v1.0.4). @GitHK is there any need to update that one?

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez dismissed pcrespov’s stale review July 31, 2025 11:36

out-of-date, please review again

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez requested a review from pcrespov July 31, 2025 11:36
Copy link
Member

@pcrespov pcrespov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I’m not fully on board with these changes and would prefer to double-check with @GitHK. That said, @JavierGOrdonnez mentioned it’s necessary for the hackathon, so I don’t want to block it. I’ll go ahead and unblock for now.

@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez merged commit 17c69b4 into master Jul 31, 2025
2 checks passed
@JavierGOrdonnez JavierGOrdonnez deleted the work/jgo/new-service-integration-library branch July 31, 2025 13:33
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.

Move tooling to ci-service-integration-library
3 participants