Support multiple artifacts generation per job
<!--IssueSummary start--> <details> <summary> Everyone can contribute. [Help move this issue forward](https://handbook.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/developer-relations/contributor-success/community-contributors-workflows/#contributor-links) while earning points, leveling up and collecting rewards. </summary> - [Close this issue](https://contributors.gitlab.com/manage-issue?action=close&projectId=278964&issueIid=18744) </details> <!--IssueSummary end--> <!-- The first section "Release notes" is required if you want to have your release post blog MR auto generated. Currently in BETA, details on the **release post item generator** can be found in the handbook: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/blog/release-posts/#release-post-item-generator and this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfn9ebgTwKg. The next four sections: "Problem to solve", "Intended users", "User experience goal", and "Proposal", are strongly recommended in your first draft, while the rest of the sections can be filled out during the problem validation or breakdown phase. However, keep in mind that providing complete and relevant information early helps our product team validate the problem and start working on a solution. --> ### Release notes TBD <!-- What is the problem and solution you're proposing? This content sets the overall vision for the feature and serves as the release notes that will populate in various places, including the [release post blog](https://about.gitlab.com/releases/categories/releases/) and [Gitlab project releases](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/releases). " --> ### Problem to solve A CI job definition with multiple "artifacts" definition generates no error or warning, even from ci/lint, but only the last artifact is taken into account. This causes issues not only with the available artifact paths, but also with the artifacts that appear in the download list. The user cannot download all artifacts from that job. * How should existing "Download" button on Job page behave? Should this download a zip containing all of the archives? * How should existing "Browse" button on Job page behave? I'm aware there is [follow up to browse archives](https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/254977), but until then, what should users expect to see when they click "Browse"? * How should the existing [Job Artifacts APIs](https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/api/job_artifacts.html) change? * `GET /projects/:id/jobs/:job_id/artifacts` * `GET /projects/:id/jobs/artifacts/:ref_name/download?job=name` * `DELETE /projects/:id/jobs/:job_id/artifacts` * If we change any of the content of the zip files sent from these APIs, we need to be careful in order not to break existing API clients. * Will additional `archives` be served as a dependencies to Runner? Currently, we serve a single artifacts archive * Downstream jobs need to be able to download specific archives from a job, instead of having to download all of the artifacts. <!-- What problem do we solve? Try to define the who/what/why of the opportunity as a user story. For example, "As a (who), I want (what), so I can (why/value)." --> ### Intended users * [Sasha (Software Developer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#sasha-software-developer) <!-- Who will use this feature? If known, include any of the following: types of users (e.g. Developer), personas, or specific company roles (e.g. Release Manager). It's okay to write "Unknown" and fill this field in later. Personas are described at https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/ * [Cameron (Compliance Manager)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#cameron-compliance-manager) * [Parker (Product Manager)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#parker-product-manager) * [Delaney (Development Team Lead)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#delaney-development-team-lead) * [Presley (Product Designer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#presley-product-designer) * [Sasha (Software Developer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#sasha-software-developer) * [Devon (DevOps Engineer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#devon-devops-engineer) * [Sidney (Systems Administrator)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#sidney-systems-administrator) * [Sam (Security Analyst)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#sam-security-analyst) * [Rachel (Release Manager)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#rachel-release-manager) * [Alex (Security Operations Engineer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#alex-security-operations-engineer) * [Simone (Software Engineer in Test)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#simone-software-engineer-in-test) * [Allison (Application Ops)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#allison-application-ops) * [Priyanka (Platform Engineer)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#priyanka-platform-engineer) * [Dana (Data Analyst)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#dana-data-analyst) * [Eddie (Content Editor)](https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/#eddie-content-editor) --> ### User experience goal Improve the experience of downloading multiple artifacts from a job, and make the experience consistent in the API. <!-- What is the single user experience workflow this problem addresses? For example, "The user should be able to use the UI/API/.gitlab-ci.yml with GitLab to <perform a specific task>" https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/ux/ux-research-training/user-story-mapping/ --> ### Proposal TBD <!-- How are we going to solve the problem? Try to include the user journey! https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/journeys/#user-journey --> ### Further details This description used to be using the bug template, so I copied over the `expected behavior` and `proposal` that was added. - At least a warning should be displayed, CI/Lint should notify of duplicate keys. But better would be to allow for multiple artifacts definitions since keywords like `expose_as` are at the `artifacts:` level, and you may want to allow for creating multiple artifact sets. **Proposal** The core of the problem here is that we currently do support only one artifacts archive per build. It means that we can have only one definition, and that GitLab Runner will create only one artifacts archive that it is going to upload to GitLab. Note that despite that we support only one archive, it is possible to have multiple artifacts reports: ```yaml artifacts: untracked: true paths: - some/path - another/path reports: junit: rspec.xml terraform: tfplan.json ``` This will create three artifacts - one ZIP archive with (`some/path/**` + `another/path/**` + untracked files) and two artifacts with reports. We could add support for multiple archives, for example you might want to upload coverage HTML report and some build objects or `.exe` files. In order to change this we can use, `archives`: ```yaml artifacts: archives: - name: coverage untracked: true paths: # ... expose_as: ... - name: binaries untracked: true paths: # ... expose_as: ... reports: junit: rspec.xml terraform: tfplan.json ``` In this format, a hash of `archives` would be provided that each would support all the `artifact` parameters (https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/yaml/#artifacts) except `reports`, since that's just another way to define a pre-set archive. This requires though that we redesign how we expose artifacts definition to a runner and how we handle uploads. This might be easy or not (hard to tell without investigation), but this is not merely a syntax problem. <!-- Include use cases, benefits, goals, or any other details that will help us understand the problem better. --> ### Permissions and Security <!-- What permissions are required to perform the described actions? Are they consistent with the existing permissions as documented for users, groups, and projects as appropriate? Is the proposed behavior consistent between the UI, API, and other access methods (e.g. email replies)? Consider adding checkboxes and expectations of users with certain levels of membership https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html * [ ] Add expected impact to members with no access (0) * [ ] Add expected impact to Guest (10) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Reporter (20) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Developer (30) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Maintainer (40) members * [ ] Add expected impact to Owner (50) members Please consider performing a threat model for the code changes that are introduced as part of this feature. To get started, refer to our Threat Modeling handbook page https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/security/threat_modeling/#threat-modeling. Don't hesitate to reach out to the Application Security Team (`@gitlab-com/gl-security/appsec`) to discuss any security concerns. --> ### Documentation <!-- See the Feature Change Documentation Workflow https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/documentation/workflow.html#for-a-product-change * Add all known Documentation Requirements in this section. See https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/development/documentation/workflow.html * If this feature requires changing permissions, update the permissions document. See https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/permissions.html --> ### Availability & Testing <!-- This section needs to be retained and filled in during the workflow planning breakdown phase of this feature proposal, if not earlier. What risks does this change pose to our availability? How might it affect the quality of the product? What additional test coverage or changes to tests will be needed? Will it require cross-browser testing? Please list the test areas (unit, integration and end-to-end) that needs to be added or updated to ensure that this feature will work as intended. Please use the list below as guidance. * Unit test changes * Integration test changes * End-to-end test change See the test engineering planning process and reach out to your counterpart Software Engineer in Test for assistance: https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/engineering/quality/test-engineering/#test-planning --> ### Available Tier <!-- This section should be used for setting the appropriate tier that this feature will belong to. Pricing can be found here: https://about.gitlab.com/pricing/ * Free * Premium/Silver * Ultimate/Gold --> ### Feature Usage Metrics <!-- How are you going to track usage of this feature? Think about user behavior and their interaction with the product. What indicates someone is getting value from it? Create tracking issue using the Snowplow event tracking template. See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Snowplow%20event%20tracking.md --> ### What does success look like, and how can we measure that? <!-- Define both the success metrics and acceptance criteria. Note that success metrics indicate the desired business outcomes, while acceptance criteria indicate when the solution is working correctly. If there is no way to measure success, link to an issue that will implement a way to measure this. Create tracking issue using the Snowplow event tracking template. See https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/blob/master/.gitlab/issue_templates/Snowplow%20event%20tracking.md --> ### What is the type of buyer? <!-- What is the buyer persona for this feature? See https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/marketing/product-marketing/roles-personas/buyer-persona/ In which enterprise tier should this feature go? See https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/pricing/#three-tiers --> ### Is this a cross-stage feature? <!-- Communicate if this change will affect multiple Stage Groups or product areas. We recommend always start with the assumption that a feature request will have an impact into another Group. Loop in the most relevant PM and Product Designer from that Group to provide strategic support to help align the Group's broader plan and vision, as well as to avoid UX and technical debt. https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/#cross-stage-features --> ### Links / references <!-- Label reminders - you should have one of each of the following labels. Use the following resources to find the appropriate labels: - https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/labels - https://about.gitlab.com/handbook/product/categories/features/ --> <!-- triage-serverless v3 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION --> *This page may contain information related to upcoming products, features and functionality. It is important to note that the information presented is for informational purposes only, so please do not rely on the information for purchasing or planning purposes. Just like with all projects, the items mentioned on the page are subject to change or delay, and the development, release, and timing of any products, features, or functionality remain at the sole discretion of GitLab Inc.* <!-- triage-serverless v3 PLEASE DO NOT REMOVE THIS SECTION -->
issue