Create
cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
Sign up Log in
Celebration

Earn badges and make progress

You're on your way to the next level! Join the Kudos program to earn points and save your progress.

Deleted user Avatar
Deleted user

Level 1: Seed

25 / 150 points

Next: Root

Avatar

1 badge earned

Collect

Participate in fun challenges

Challenges come and go, but your rewards stay with you. Do more to earn more!

Challenges
Coins

Gift kudos to your peers

What goes around comes around! Share the love by gifting kudos to your peers.

Recognition
Ribbon

Rise up in the ranks

Keep earning points to reach the top of the leaderboard. It resets every quarter so you always have a chance!

Leaderboard

Come for the products,
stay for the community

The Atlassian Community can help you and your team get more value out of Atlassian products and practices.

Atlassian Community about banner
4,462,036
Community Members
 
Community Events
176
Community Groups

looking for CD/CI solutions for testing firmware on physical hardware

Currently using bitbucket webhooks with Jenkins controller-agent framework to test firmware, which is working well but looking for a more modern, integrated and secure solution. From what I've read, the bitbucket pipelines functionality is more catered for cloud testing services.

For more of an understanding of what I'm trying to achieve:

[push / pull-request] -> [repo cloned to a local machine] -> [testing firmware on physical device] -> [test results available on bitbucket pipelines]

These firmware tests could take longer than 120 mins therefore self hosted runners are not an option.


Any suggestions are greatly appreciated.

1 answer

1 accepted

1 vote
Answer accepted

Hi Josiah and welcome to the community.

Having the test results available on the Bitbucket Pipelines page is only possible with Pipelines that run in our own infrastructure or with Pipelines runners (in your own infrastructure).

We have a feature request for the ability to extend the execution time beyond 120 mins for self-hosted runners:

If this is something you'd be interested in, I would suggest adding your vote to the feature request (by selecting the Vote for this issue link) as the number of votes helps the development team and product managers better understand the demand for new features. You are more than welcome to leave any feedback, and you can also add yourself as a watcher (by selecting the Start watching this issue link) if you'd like to get notified via email on updates.

I also wanted to mention that the 120 mins limit applies to each step of the pipeline and not to the whole build. In case you're running e.g. 5 commands and each of them completes in less than 120 minutes, you could divide them into separate (possibly parallel) steps with a runner.

Kind regards,
Theodora

Hi Theodora,

Thank you for your help! Are you able to say on average how many votes a feature is required to have before it is considered? Just trying to decide on whether or not we should be working with the self hosted runners in hope of this change or look for other options.

Many thanks,
Josiah

Suggest an answer

Log in or Sign up to answer
DEPLOYMENT TYPE
CLOUD
PERMISSIONS LEVEL
Site Admin
TAGS

Atlassian Community Events