Add an updateLock step to alter resources in pipelines

[gaspardpetit]

This PR proposes to add a new updateLock step which can be used to alter the resource configuration. Maybe updateResource would be better, but I thought users of this plugin would find updateLock more intuitive.

With this change, the following can be altered:

• adding labels
• removing labels
• setting labels (replacing)
• setting the note
• creating new locks
• deleting existing locks

New locks are created persistent (non-ephemeral). The use case for this can be having a job that would configure the locks based on an external source (ex. scm). I have not yet figured out how the sync could remove invalid locks (we will probably need a way to list locks so the ones removed from scm can be deleted - open for discussion)

Deleted locks are set to ephemeral if currently locked.

Once #299 is in, I will submit another PR to allow properties to be altered as well.

• [x] Make sure you are opening from a topic/feature/bugfix branch (right side) and not your main branch!
• [x] Ensure that the pull request title represents the desired changelog entry
• [x] Please describe what you did
• [X] Link to relevant issues in GitHub or Jira
• [x] Link to relevant pull requests, esp. upstream and downstream changes
• [x] Ensure you have provided tests - that demonstrates feature works or fixes the issue

[gaspardpetit]

I just realized the org.jenkins.plugins.lockableresources.LockableResourcesManager can be imported in groovy - so I think this step may not be necessary :D

[gaspardpetit]

I take this back, working straight on the org.jenkins.plugins.lockableresources.LockableResourcesManager is painful

[gaspardpetit]

I worked a bit more on this - so the original pipeline looks like this - using the LockableResourcesManager directly:

import org.jenkins.plugins.lockableresources.LockableResourcesManager as LRM
script {
  Map resources = readYaml(file: 'resources.yaml')

  resources.each { k, v ->
    LRM.get().createResource(k)
    def r = LRM.get().fromName(k)
    r.setEphemeral(false)
    if (v.labels) {
      r.setLabels(v.labels.join(" "))
    }
    else {
      r.setLabels("")
    }
  }

  def allResources = LRM.get().getResources();
  List toBeDeleted = []
  for (resource in allResources) {
    if (resources.keySet().contains(resource.getName()) == false) {
      toBeDeleted += resource
    }
  }

  for (toDelete in toBeDeleted) {
    LRM.get().getResources().remove(toDelete)
  }

  LRM.get().save()
}

With this propose change, I am simplifying it down to

script {
  Map resources = readYaml(file: 'resources.yaml')

  resources.each { k, v ->
    updateLock(resource:k, createResource:true, setLabels:(v.labels?:[]).join(" "))
  }

  def allResources = LRM.get().getResources();
  List toBeDeleted = []
  for (resource in allResources) {
    if (resources.contains(resource.getName()) == false) {
      toBeDeleted += resource
    }
  }

  for (toDelete in toBeDeleted) {
    updateLock(resource: toDelete, deleteResource:true)
  }
}

After this change, the step I'd be missing would be a findLocks step - then I could go

script {
  Map resources = readYaml(file: 'resources.yaml')

  resources.each { k, v ->
    updateLock(resource:k, createResource:true, setLabels:(v.labels?:[]).join(" "))
  }

  for (resource in findLocks()) {
    if (resources.contains(resource.name) == false) {
      updateLock(resource: toDelete, deleteResource:true)
    }
  }
}

[DonnieKim411]

Any update on this? this feature will be super useful for our use case... in fact, many PR requests by @gaspardpetit are exactly what I am looking for to fully adopt this plugin.