-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 29.8k
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Tracking Issue: commit queue issues and feedback #34770
Comments
Tried two pull requests, both failed:
|
Simple cases of two last points may be fixed with |
skipChecks will allow skipping certain checks. Useful to skip "commit after last approval" on commit queue. Ref: nodejs/node#34770
skipChecks will allow skipping certain checks. Useful to skip "commit after last approval" on commit queue. Ref: nodejs/node#34770
🤔 Anyone knows why but these PRs failed to apply patches: even though locally it applied successfully with manual |
We should add a link to the Action in the bot comment: so we don't have to go chasing it every time it fails: https://github.com/nodejs/node/runs/1102351422?check_suite_focus=true As for the failures, I'm not entirely sure, it should've worked 🤔 One thing to do when this happens is to run |
Should wait for GitHub Actions to finish running as well: #35160 (comment) |
Any idea why #34951 is skipped? |
We have quite a backlog of scheduled Actions for the past hour, so something is up with GitHub apparently: @aduh95 ncu thinks the CI is still running. Since the label was added four days ago, it's unrelated to the security release lockdown, but I can't check the CI status now because of the lockdown. If I forget to look at it tomorrow after the lockdown is lifted, feel free to ping me. |
In #33770 (comment), a PR with 3 commits, the bot commented only with the last commit hash, instead of a range. |
Nice catch, we added the autorebase flag but didn't update the comment generation |
Found another issue: if a jenkins run was deleted but that's the newest one in the PR, it'll show as "pending" by ncu, which will cause the commit queue to skip (it should fail instead). Also, having a successful CI run should take precedence over having a non-CI already-deleted Jenkins run (like a CITGM or benchmark). Screenshot might make it easier to understand the issue: |
NCU considers CITGM runs? They're hardly ever green 😞. (It's probably still worth checking one was started, particular for semver-majors.) |
It checks all Jenkins links it knows how to parse |
Commit queue for #35423 failed but didn't post the reason to the PR (but did update the labels). |
The logs for that run are here: https://github.com/nodejs/node/runs/1187952829?check_suite_focus=true It didn't post the reason because the output was apparently too long for |
i never thought I would see the day jq would be bested |
Looks like that run tried to land more than one PR -- perhaps an edge case where the first failure left things in a bad state? |
From #34770 (comment):
The same appears to have happened with #35332 (comment) |
Perhaps related to nodejs/node-core-utils#486? |
Yeah I think 486 is definitely related |
Fix: #35468 |
Wow that's an interesting edge case. There's probably nothing we can do about CQ being unable to land PRs changing an Action, but it should add the -failed label. |
Actually, after reading the error again, it should be possible to push changes to .github/workflows assuming that's something we want. We'll need to request an extra scope for the PAT on nodejs/admin though. |
Added scope to our PAT token, so now we can land PRs with |
The CQ is not working anymore:
https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions/runs/463941833 Maybe related to the recent token change? |
That's plausible, I'll take a look. |
re-generated the token and added it here. |
Same error on recent run (https://github.com/nodejs/node/runs/1655255308?check_suite_focus=true), this must come from somewhere else 🤷♂️ |
Looks like the |
The request errors with:
I temporarily disabled the workflow in https://github.com/nodejs/node/actions?query=workflow%3A%22Auto+Start+CI%22 |
I guess this needs someone from the @nodejs/tsc (@mmarchini ?) who can see/generate the tokens to reenable the auto start CI and commit queue workflows. |
Oh no. I'll try to take a look at it over the weekend. |
Ping @nodejs/tsc again (will also add to the tsc-agenda) regarding the token (which requires an owner, so I guess we could also ping the commcomm) and the broken commit queue. (FTR I'm not sure what it needs/currently has.). If we're unable to maintain the commit queue we should probably remove it 😞. |
What kind of token do we need here? |
@joyeecheung not sure, the token that we have already should work. It needs permission to edit PRs (to add/remove labels) as well as to commit to the main branch of the repository. It might need other permissions I don't remember from the top of my head. |
Removing agenda tag |
Is it possible that this is related to actions/labeler#50 and actions/first-interaction#10? |
I'm re-enabling the queue so I can test out the token, if it starts to generate too much spam notifications I'll disable it again. |
@tniessen that shouldn't be the case since we're using the @nodejs-github-bot account and a |
Updated the token, seems like at some point we lost the |
I think |
I think that's a won't fix, we've added a lint rule to validate deprecation numbers that doesn't allow |
commit-queue
can be used to land pull requests. It is still experimental, so when using please remember to check if the Pull Request landed successfully. Please share any failed landings here so we can keep track of issues, our landing process is quite complex and full of edge cases, we'll need to tweak thecommit-queue
andnode-core-utils
before we can consider this feature stable.I'll keep this issue updated with all known issues.
Commits pushed since last review (buffer: alias UInt ➡️ Uint in buffer methods #34729 (comment))manual-land
label)Can't land DEPXXX (doc: add missing DEP ID for 'new crypto.Certificate()' #34940)(Won't fix, see tools: lint deprecation codes #41992).github/workflows
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: