Skip to content
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

Start RHCOS arch jobs earlier #1164

Merged

Conversation

joepvd
Copy link
Contributor

@joepvd joepvd commented Nov 28, 2024

No description provided.

Copy link

@jlebon jlebon left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Basically the downside of this is that any failure related to building artifacts or testing the live artifacts will now happen after we've already forked off the other arches. Which means that instead of getting one failure in the pipeline, we'll get four.

SGTM if you want to try this, but it's a trade-off, and we might decide to toggle it back off or refine it (so that it's only enabled e.g. once we're past a certain milestone).

This also relates to openshift/enhancements#1637. A big part of the churn are the OpenShift packages, and it's going to be much cheaper to rebuild just the OCP layer on top.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 28, 2024

@jlebon: changing LGTM is restricted to collaborators

In response to this:

Basically the downside of this is that any failure related to building artifacts or testing the live artifacts will now happen after we've already forked off the other arches. Which means that instead of getting one failure in the pipeline, we'll get four.

SGTM if you want to try this, but it's a trade-off, and we might decide to toggle it back off or refine it (so that it's only enabled e.g. once we're past a certain milestone).

This also relates to openshift/enhancements#1637. A big part of the churn are the OpenShift packages, and it's going to be much cheaper to rebuild just the OCP layer on top.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository.

Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 28, 2024

@joepvd: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/security 4508816 link false /test security

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@joepvd joepvd added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. labels Nov 28, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 28, 2024

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

Approval requirements bypassed by manually added approval.

This pull-request has been approved by: jlebon

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit f60b751 into openshift-eng:main Nov 28, 2024
2 of 3 checks passed
@joepvd joepvd deleted the rhcos-early-arch-jobs branch November 28, 2024 18:28
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants