Skip to content

Refactor JSON generator for susemanager-ci after 5.0.5 & 4.3.16 BV results #1727

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
szachovy wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Refactor JSON generator for susemanager-ci after 5.0.5 & 4.3.16 BV results #1727

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
42f9b64
Refactor JSON generator for susemanager-ci after 5.0.5 & 4.3.16 BV re…
szachovy Aug 25, 2025
348a843
Refactor JSON generator for susemanager-ci after 5.0.5 & 4.3.16 BV re…
szachovy Aug 26, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
4 changes: 3 additions & 1 deletion jenkins_pipelines/scripts/json_generator/maintenance_json_generator.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -91,7 +91,6 @@ def update_custom_repositories(custom_repositories: dict[str, dict[str, str]], n
node_ids[final_id] = url
custom_repositories[node] = node_ids


def find_valid_repos(mi_ids: set[str], version: str):
version_data = get_version_nodes(version)

Expand All @@ -101,6 +100,9 @@ def find_valid_repos(mi_ids: set[str], version: str):
custom_repositories = init_custom_repositories(version, static_repos)

for node, repositories in dynamic_nodes.items():
if node in ["openeuler2403_minion"]:
Copy link

Copilot AI Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The condition uses a list with a single element for checking if a node should be skipped. Since there's only one element in the list, this could be simplified to a direct string comparison: if node == "openeuler2403_minion":. However, if more nodes are expected to be added to this skip list in the future, the current list approach is acceptable for extensibility.

Suggested change
if node in ["openeuler2403_minion"]:
if node == "openeuler2403_minion":

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
# openeuler minion are deployed but not used for SLE MU & BV MIs
Copy link

Copilot AI Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The comment states "openeuler minion are deployed but not used for SLE MU & BV MIs" but uses plural "minion" instead of "minions". The grammatically correct form should be "openeuler minions are deployed" or "the openeuler minion is deployed".

Suggested change
# openeuler minion are deployed but not used for SLE MU & BV MIs
# openeuler minions are deployed but not used for SLE MU & BV MIs

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
continue
for mi_id in mi_ids:
for repo in repositories:
repo_url: str = create_url(mi_id, repo)
Expand Down
8 changes: 5 additions & 3 deletions jenkins_pipelines/scripts/json_generator/repository_versions/v43_nodes.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -74,7 +74,6 @@
"liberty9_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_EL_9-CLIENT-TOOLS_x86_64/"},
"oracle9_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_EL_9-CLIENT-TOOLS_x86_64/"},
"amazon2023_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_EL_9-CLIENT-TOOLS_x86_64/"},
"openeuler2403_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_EL_9-CLIENT-TOOLS_x86_64/"},
"slemicro51_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Manager-Tools-For-Micro_5_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SUSE-MicroOS_5.1_x86_64/"},
"slemicro52_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Manager-Tools-For-Micro_5_x86_64/",
Expand All @@ -90,10 +89,13 @@
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Micro_5.5_x86_64/"},
"slmicro60_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Manager-Tools-For-Micro_6_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SUSE-MicroOS_6.0_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Micro_6.0_x86_64/"},
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Micro_6.0_x86_64/",
"/SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/"},
"slmicro61_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Manager-Tools-For-Micro_6_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SUSE-MicroOS_6.1_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Micro_6.1_x86_64/"},
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Micro_6.1_x86_64/",
"/SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/",
"/SUSE:/SLFO:/1.1:/Staging:/Z/standard/"},
"salt_migration_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Manager-Tools_15_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Module-Basesystem_15-SP5_x86_64/",
"/SUSE_Updates_SLE-Module-Server-Applications_15-SP5_x86_64/"},
Expand Down
11 changes: 6 additions & 5 deletions jenkins_pipelines/scripts/json_generator/repository_versions/v51_nodes.py
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -28,16 +28,14 @@
v51_nodes_static_client_tools_repositories: Dict[str, Dict[str, str]] = {
"alma8_minion": {
"RES_8_client_tools": "/RES-8:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-8-x86_64-Media1/"},
"amazon2023_minion": {
"EL_9_client_tools": "/EL-9:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-9-x86_64-Media1/"},
"alma9_minion": {
"EL_9_client_tools": "/EL-9:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-9-x86_64-Media1/"},
"amazon2023_minion": {
"EL_9_client_tools": "/EL-9:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-9-x86_64-Media1/"},
"centos7_minion": {
"RES_7_client_tools": "/RES-7:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/ManagerTools-EL7-POOL-x86_64-Media/"},
"liberty9_minion": {
"EL_9_client_tools": "/EL-9:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-9-x86_64-Media1/"},
"openeuler2403_minion": {
"EL_9_client_tools": "/EL-9:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/MultiLinuxManagerTools-EL-9-x86_64-Media1/"},
"opensuse156arm_minion": {
"sle15_arm_client_tools": "/SLE-15:/Update:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools/images/repo/ManagerTools-SLE15-Pool-aarch64-Media1/"},
"oracle9_minion": {
Expand Down Expand Up @@ -123,7 +121,10 @@
v51_nodes_dynamic_client_tools_repos: Dict[str, Dict[str, str]] = {
"debian12_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_MultiLinuxManagerTools_Debian-12_x86_64/"},
"ubuntu2204_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_MultiLinuxManagerTools_Ubuntu-22.04_x86_64/"},
"ubuntu2404_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_MultiLinuxManagerTools_Ubuntu-24.04_x86_64/"}
"ubuntu2404_minion": {"/SUSE_Updates_MultiLinuxManagerTools_Ubuntu-24.04_x86_64/"},
"slmicro60_minion": {"/SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/"},
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@maximenoel8 maximenoel8 Aug 25, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have the full story of those repositories. By from my experience they were statics. Do they replace

susemanager-ci/jenkins_pipelines/scripts/json_generator/repository_versions/v51_nodes.py

Lines 115 to 120 in f3718e7

"slmicro60_minion": {
"slmicro6_client_tools": "/SLFO:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools:/SL-Micro-6:/ToTest/product/repo/Multi-Linux-ManagerTools-SL-Micro-6-x86_64/"
},
"slmicro61_minion": {
"slmicro6_client_tools": "/SLFO:/Products:/MultiLinuxManagerTools:/SL-Micro-6:/ToTest/product/repo/Multi-Linux-ManagerTools-SL-Micro-6-x86_64/"
}
?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@szachovy szachovy Aug 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't know what static/dynamic here means, but they do not replace this repos because they are empty now (dynamic content). If new tools appear for testing, there will include versions to test (static links). Should I move them here?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@maximenoel8 maximenoel8 Aug 26, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We had to separate repository types for the MU .
The dynamic repositories, you only describe the path suffix and the MU number will finish the repository paths. So they will be generated dynamically and be unique for each MU.
The static repositories, the repository path is always the same, releng will push the new packages into this new repository. They will be common for all MUs.
Those two parts are setup differently in the json generator. So adding a static repo to the dynamic section will probably break it.
From my memory, /SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/ don't extend with MU number. Also until now, we were using SLFO:/Products for slmicro6X but those repositories were meant to change. We should be clear which one to use and how they are configured. It's probably a question for releng.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

@szachovy szachovy Aug 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

ping @raulillo82

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@ktsamis ktsamis Aug 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No they won't have MI numbers for these, the new SLFO workflow says that these repos will always be the same. I thought for this you skip the MI number in the url creation but still create the url without just the number so the result is the original, that's why I approved. If that is not the case, yes we need to keep them static for sure.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@maximenoel8 maximenoel8 Aug 26, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It is cover with the two static and dynamic dictionaries (see previous explanation)
The issue I was pointing was /SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/ should be in the static dictionary.
But because we already have SLFO path describe for slmicro6.X, I was asking if we need both SLFO and /SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/ or just one.

"slmicro61_minion": {"/SUSE:/ALP:/Source:/Standard:/1.0:/Staging:/Z/standard/",
"/SUSE:/SLFO:/1.1:/Staging:/Z/standard/"}
Comment on lines +125 to +127
Copy link

Copilot AI Jan 13, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The slmicro60_minion and slmicro61_minion nodes are defined in both the static repositories dictionary (v51_nodes_static_client_tools_repositories at lines 113-118) and the dynamic repositories dictionary (v51_nodes_dynamic_client_tools_repos at lines 125-127). This causes these nodes to have repositories from both sources when get_v51_static_and_client_tools is called. This duplication may lead to unexpected behavior in the maintenance_json_generator where both static and dynamic repositories for the same node are processed. Consider whether these nodes should only be in one dictionary or if the code in maintenance_json_generator.py needs to handle this overlap correctly.

Copilot uses AI. Check for mistakes.
}

def get_v51_static_and_client_tools(variant: str = "micro") -> (Dict[str, Dict[str, str]], Dict[str, List[str]]):
Expand Down
Loading