Carry our own webhooks implementation #4426
Conversation
|
LGTM |
|
Although I wonder why you dropped the idea of having this mechanism upstream, especially that they were eager to have it after getting it fleshed out. |
|
Eh, Daniel raised too many questions :) I also think the use case for this is more limited than it seems. On Aug 31, 2015, at 6:19 AM, Maciej Szulik [email protected] wrote: Although I wonder why you dropped the idea of having this mechanism — |
|
Let's keep it on our radar, I'd like to work on fleshing it out and implementing it upstream, but I guess that'll be post 3.1. |
|
It needs a use case upstream, I don't know what that use case is yet.
[merge]
|
|
continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/merge SUCCESS (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/merge_pull_requests_origin/3176/) (Image: devenv-fedora_2255) |
|
[Test]ing while waiting on the merge queue |
|
continuous-integration/openshift-jenkins/test FAILURE (https://ci.openshift.redhat.com/jenkins/job/test_pull_requests_origin/4616/) |
|
Evaluated for origin test up to 7edffe4 |
|
[merge] |
1 similar comment
|
[merge] |
Finishing a job is an example use-case, which also covers our build scenario. |
|
Evaluated for origin merge up to 7edffe4 |
|
Why would a web hook finish a job? On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 6:24 AM, OpenShift Bot [email protected]
Clayton Coleman | Lead Engineer, OpenShift |
|
My bad, I was thinking the other way around where there will be a webhook notification of a finished job. Whereas we want to trigger something from a webhook. I'll just hide, since weird thoughts come to my mind recently 😉 |
|
Ok, now I have a valid use-case that makes sense 😉 In the scheduled job proposal (kubernetes/kubernetes#11980) we allow starting a job based on a schedule or on demand, which can be a webhook, for example. |
|
Ok, that's a use case I can live with. On Sep 1, 2015, at 3:27 PM, Maciej Szulik [email protected] wrote: Ok, now I have a valid use-case that makes sense [image: 😉] In the — |
No description provided.