capacity providers #211
capacity providers #211
Conversation
| @@ -307,7 +307,7 @@ TaskDefinition registerTemplate(final String cloudName, final ECSTaskTemplate te | |||
|
|
|||
| if (template.isFargate()) { | |||
| request | |||
| .withRequiresCompatibilities(template.getLaunchType()) | |||
| .withRequiresCompatibilities("FARGATE") | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we use a constant for "FARGATE" and "awsvpc"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not sure how to do that properly. (not from a development background). Do you have a sample somewhere in the code, so that I can refer.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You can re-use the enum in com.amazonaws.services.ecs.model
Example, for "FARGATE" you can use the enum in com.amazonaws.services.ecs.model.LaunchType
And for "awsvpc", you can use the enum in com.amazonaws.services.ecs.model.NetworkMode
|
Merging this in adds a new permission requirement. Should probably add that to the README file. |
Fixed |
|
@webratz This could probably be something to merge in. We've been running this on our boxes for a while now and both Fargate and EC2 based tasks handle this nicely with the default capacity provider setting. |
|
Do we know when this will be officially merged in? |
|
see #200 |
|
@webratz We started using this plugin recently and realized that you cannot cap max nodes it can spin up. Is there anything holding up this PR to be merged? This is one of the important feature for us to use this plugin. I would really appreciate if this can be merged. |
|
@webratz , If it isn't too much to ask could this be merged? I understand you are looking for a new maintainer, but getting this change in would allow my Org to use a non-forked version of this project. |
|
We would really like for this PR to be merged in. We are actively using this code in our production environment (going on 2 months now). But it means we had to build it and side-load it because the code has not been released in this plugin yet. |
|
@willychase @tdspencer3 I'll look into this this week & merge ( I'm also using a similar version in my company as well, for the last 4 months now) |
|
Any plans to merge this soon? this would be awesome to have without having to custom build/install it |
|
@carlosrodf Let me see if I can get CI to pass and I will review and merge |
|
@carlosrodf Wheels fall of the bus here: @carlosrodf, @chathsuom will need to correct that. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seeing failures in
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] Caused by: org.apache.maven.plugin.compiler.CompilationFailureException: Compilation failure
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] /home/jenkins/workspace/Plugins_amazon-ecs-plugin_PR-211/src/main/java/com/cloudbees/jenkins/plugins/amazonecs/ECSTaskTemplate.java:[1038,41] no suitable constructor found for ECSService(java.lang.String,java.lang.String)
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] constructor com.cloudbees.jenkins.plugins.amazonecs.ECSService.ECSService(java.lang.String,java.lang.String,java.lang.String) is not applicable
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] (actual and formal argument lists differ in length)
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] constructor com.cloudbees.jenkins.plugins.amazonecs.ECSService.ECSService(java.util.function.Supplier<com.amazonaws.services.ecs.AmazonECS>) is not applicable
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z] (actual and formal argument lists differ in length)
[2021-01-28T23:52:20.636Z]
I will have a look soon. |
Fixed |
|
@markyjackson-taulia can an official release be made that includes this? |
Enabling capacity provider support