Support #22594: Remove unused Packer image builds from arvados-dev - Arvados

Actions

Copy link

Support #22594

closed

Remove unused Packer image builds from arvados-dev

Added by Brett Smith about 1 month ago. Updated about 1 month ago.

Status:

Resolved

Priority:

Normal

Assigned To:

Brett Smith

Category:

Target version:

Development 2025-02-26

Due date:

Story points:

Description

Just as general cleanup. Most of the image builds are obsolete, for different reasons.

One build that isn't obviously obsolete and on the fence is jenkins-image-arvados-formula-tests. This installs the kitchen gem used to test our Salt formula. This seems like it could be useful, but we haven't actually run those tests in three years despite making formula changes in the meantime. I'm concerned the image has probably bitrotted and it's probably not worth fixing if we plan to migrate to an Ansible-based installer instead.

Subtasks 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

Related issues 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Brett Smith about 1 month ago

arvados-dev branch 22594-unused-packer-images @ 88d87bdd1bef841fefd1f5512b86c5c2d73b43df

Since we decided we want to use as few Jenkins images as possible, I've gone through and audited the rest, and shown they can either be replaced by jenkins-image-arvados-tests, or they're unused.

This branch deletes the code for those unused images from arvados-dev. Each image has a commit explaining the rationale. After this, we have no more provision shell scripts, just two templates+two Ansible playbooks sharing code.

New test-provision image to show the new Ansible playbook working: packer-build-provision-testing-image: #60

All agreed upon points are implemented / addressed.
- Yes
Anything not implemented (discovered or discussed during work) has a follow-up story.
- N/A
Code is tested and passing, both automated and manual, what manual testing was done is described
- See above
Documentation has been updated.
- N/A, these images are already unlisted in our documentation
Behaves appropriately at the intended scale (describe intended scale).
- N/A
Considered backwards and forwards compatibility issues between client and server.
- N/A
Follows our coding standards and GUI style guidelines.
- N/A