JanZerebecki added a subscriber: JanZerebecki. JanZerebecki added a comment.
For the script I just merged to be used with all repos a version of https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T111181 needs to be implemented which, as a minimum uses that script on nodepool slaves (running any other existing CI entry points from it is not a blocker for using that script). Checking if dependent commits are merged: I have no idea if nodepool based jenkins slaves can ssh directly to gerrit, which is probably a good idea to check before spending more work on checking if dependencies are already merged. The check for already merged commit ids would be more difficult as the script would also run on patch upload where it should not fail. But it should on merge. So those should default to warnings. This is only useful for commit ids across repositories, as the dependencies in the same repo can be expressed through which parent the commit is based on. Some of those repos might be on different hosts. So perhaps it is better to introduce special syntax like a Depends-On: line only for corss repo dependencies on the same host. For different hosts we could add the repo location to the line so it knows which repo needs checking and if it knows how to check it do that remotely. Regarding warnings vs. errors: Things that don't make the script fail will never be seen on gerrit (people don't look in the job output). If there are things that should be enabled on some repos but not others a config file with a default location might be needed. If there are IDs for errors and warnings we should make the ID not depend on the warning or error status, as when one wants to change that status one would need to change the ID. In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T109119#1541555, @XZise wrote: > So I went ahead and “just” hacked something together in > https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/P1881. It just needs SSH, git and Python > (should work on any Python version since 2.7). Could you look at the patch I just merged and create follow up patches with additional features you want from your script? In https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T109119#1633921, @XZise wrote: > Hmm my main concern about such a checker is how we'd handle reasonable > exceptions. Maybe there is some reason why something can violate the rules > and then I don't want that some script is making it impossible. Don't ever add rules that have reasonable exceptions. Only things that should never be done should be checked with such a script. TASK DETAIL https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T109119 EMAIL PREFERENCES https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/settings/panel/emailpreferences/ To: JanZerebecki Cc: JanZerebecki, Legoktm, bd808, gerritbot, hashar, greg, Aklapper, pywikibot-bugs-list, XZise _______________________________________________ pywikibot-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/pywikibot-bugs
