Den mån 18 dec. 2023 kl 09:40 skrev Daniel Shahaf <d...@daniel.shahaf.name>:
> Daniel Sahlberg wrote on Thu, 30 Nov 2023 07:00 +00:00: > > Den ons 29 nov. 2023 kl 17:25 skrev Nathan Hartman < > hartman.nat...@gmail.com > >>: > > > >> On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 8:40 AM Daniel Sahlberg > >> <daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > > >> > Den ons 29 nov. 2023 kl 06:55 skrev Daniel Sahlberg < > >> daniel.l.sahlb...@gmail.com>: > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> ons 29 nov. 2023 kl. 05:57 skrev Nathan Hartman < > >> hartman.nat...@gmail.com>: > >> >>> > >> >>> The backport bot (svn-role) normally runs nightly but the most > recent > >> >>> backport approval has been waiting in 1.14.x/STATUS for a couple of > >> >>> days now. > >> >>> > >> >>> I went ahead and merged it manually (with > >> >>> tools/dist/merge-approved-backports.py). This did the right thing, > so > >> >>> I assume there wasn't any syntax error in STATUS. > >> >>> > > That was r1914201, I take it. > Correct > > >> >>> I don't have access to svn-qavm1 so I can't check why it didn't > happen > >> >>> automatically. Maybe someone with access could check if the machine > is > >> >>> at least running... > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks, > >> >>> Nathan > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> I’ll check later today > >> >> > >> > > >> > Now I've spent some time looking. > >> > > >> > The backports is a cron job running at 04.00 UTC so it isn't really a > >> bot that is running in the background. As far as I could see it was > started > >> successfully every day for the last week, but there were no real logs > >> around what happened. It SHOULD have succeeded as far as I can tell. > >> > > >> > One difference is that the backport "bot" is using backport.pl > instead > >> of the Python backport implementation. Don't know if there was a subtle > >> difference in STATUS that caused backport.pl to barf while packport.py > >> succeeded. > >> > > >> > Lets keep our eyes open for the next backport. > >> > > >> > Kind regards, > >> > Daniel > >> > >> > >> Thanks for checking! > >> > >> Based on when upcoming.part.html was last updated, I assume > >> site/tools/upcoming.py is run by another cron job at 04.15 UTC; it > >> looks like I manually merged the backport a little bit after it ran > >> last night, so I'll watch to see if it shows up in upcoming.part.html > >> tonight... > >> > >> Thanks again, > >> Nathan > >> > > > > Upcoming worked well tonight so I guess there might been something in the > > STATUS file that prevented automated backport. If it fails again tonight > > (with the new nominations), I'd like to check running packport.pl > manually. > > It was probably the «*» at the start of line 2. > That might be the thing, yes. Thanks for the explaination. > > To prevent recurrence, options include (1) make the cron job use the .py > implementation; (2) add a regression test to backport_tests.py [sic] and > then fix backport.pl's parsing. > > Glad to see backport.py being used :-) > > Daniel > I'm considering to switch to backport.py after the release of 1.14.5 (should be discussed on dev@ first of course) for the reasons mentioned in the readme: "written in a language that many more active developers are comfortable with"). If we could add the missing functions (Reviewing STATUS and Adding new entries) or decide that those ore not needed anymore we could then remove backport.pl and have one way of doing stuff. Kind regards, Daniel
