I opened an issue to outline the design we're discussing: https://pulp.plan.io/issues/5795
David On Mon, Nov 25, 2019 at 11:33 AM Brian Bouterse <bmbou...@redhat.com> wrote: > > > On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 3:15 PM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> I think there are a couple caveats with this approach. One thing is I >> think Travis will need to do is remove the "Needs Cherry Pick" label since >> it's stateless and it won't be able to keep track of what's already been >> cherry picked. >> >> +1, then it's stateless > > Also, there's the question of what to do when the cherry pick fails. >> Travis could fail the job (this would probably be the easiest thing). I >> imagine the release engineer will need to monitor the job and manually >> merge any failed cherry picks if the job fails. >> > +1 to Travis failing the job, leaving the labels unchanged, and having a > human look at it > >> >> David >> >> >> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 10:35 AM Brian Bouterse <bmbou...@redhat.com> >> wrote: >> >>> I was thinking we could make this happen quicker if we simplify it a >>> bit, then we can add on more later. What if we: >>> >>> 1) Have humans apply the "Cherry Pick" label and not integrate with >>> Redmine >>> 2) Have Travis run once a day to create the PR of all merged PRs with >>> the cherry pick label that have not yet been cherry picked. >>> 3) Have a human merge the "cherry pick" PR daily >>> >>> We could make ^ run as a cron job on Travis, and then this would be >>> available to all plugins who configure it to be enabled. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Nov 22, 2019 at 8:46 AM Ina Panova <ipan...@redhat.com> wrote: >>> >>>> +1 to automate cherry-picking. I like that depending on the label set, >>>> commit will be cherry-picked or not. >>>> >>>> >>>> -------- >>>> Regards, >>>> >>>> Ina Panova >>>> Senior Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc. >>>> >>>> "Do not go where the path may lead, >>>> go instead where there is no path and leave a trail." >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:43 PM Brian Bouterse <bmbou...@redhat.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> After cherry picking a whole bunch today, I am very in favor of >>>>> automation to do it. >>>>> >>>>> I had hoped we could avoid writing/maintaining a service, but I looked >>>>> around, and I don't see a hosted "cherry-pick bot" like dependabot for >>>>> example. Can we set it up to run next to pulpbot? Or maybe we run it as a >>>>> cron job on Travis (see below). Overall though big +1. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:07 PM Mike DePaulo <mikedep...@redhat.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:01 AM David Davis <davidda...@redhat.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On our scrum with Katello yesterday, they raised an issue that since >>>>>>> they are developing against our release branches, they need bug fixes >>>>>>> to be >>>>>>> cherry picked to release branches asap. Currently this is up to release >>>>>>> leads, but we've seen this week that this is problematic as two of our >>>>>>> release leads have been out/unavailable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One suggestion is to automate the cherry picking process. I think we >>>>>>> could develop a PR bot similar to the one Foretello uses[1] (see this >>>>>>> PR[2] >>>>>>> as an example). I think the basic workflow for this bot would be: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - If a PR is created with no issue attached or [noissue], it would >>>>>>> loudly warn that no issue is attached >>>>>>> - If the PR has a redmine issue attached, it would: >>>>>>> - Attach the PR to the redmine issue and set the status to POST[3] >>>>>>> - Set the PR labels depending on the issue type. One of the labels >>>>>>> would be 'Needs Cherrypick' if the issue type is a bug. This label can >>>>>>> be >>>>>>> removed before merge for things we don't want cherry picked. >>>>>>> - When any PR is merged with 'Needs Cherrypick', it could either >>>>>>> automatically open a cherrypick PR or actually do the cherrypick >>>>>>> (falling >>>>>>> back to a PR if the merge fails due to conflicts). >>>>>>> >>>>>> I think it's good to put the cherry-pick back through the PR process >>>>> so having it open a PR would be good so that the tests run. Maybe it >>>>> should >>>>> run daily though so we don't increase the travis load and we can test a >>>>> group of cherry picks together? Note travis could maybe run this as a cron >>>>> job and run it there instead? >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>> Thoughts? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [0] >>>>>>> https://pulpproject.org/2019/11/04/pulp-3-GA-update/#cherry-picking >>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/theforeman/prprocessor >>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/Katello/katello/pull/8441 >>>>>>> [3] https://pulp.plan.io/issues/4365 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> David >>>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> +1 >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> Mike DePaulo >>>>>> >>>>>> He / Him / His >>>>>> >>>>>> Service Reliability Engineer, Pulp >>>>>> >>>>>> Red Hat <https://www.redhat.com/> >>>>>> >>>>>> IM: mikedep333 >>>>>> >>>>>> GPG: 51745404 >>>>>> <https://www.redhat.com/> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pulp-dev mailing list >>> Pulp-dev@redhat.com >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev >>> >>
_______________________________________________ Pulp-dev mailing list Pulp-dev@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-dev
