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

Tide re-ran an overridden job #238

Open
dhaiducek opened this issue Aug 16, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Tide re-ran an overridden job #238

dhaiducek opened this issue Aug 16, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@dhaiducek
Copy link
Contributor

dhaiducek commented Aug 16, 2024

We have a job I overrode when I submitted the PR but then it took a while for it to get approved. Once it finally did get approved, Tide ran the overridden job, which it shouldn't have done.

@dhaiducek dhaiducek changed the title Tide re-ran an overridden second stage job Tide re-ran an overridden job Aug 19, 2024
@petr-muller
Copy link
Contributor

it shouldn't have done.

There are opinions on this, it's not entirely clear. Tide retests jobs when HEAD of the target branch moves since the job executed, because target branch change means the job results before that are essentially obsolete (ran on different code than would be the result of the merge now). Now, when people override, they do it for two reasons:

  1. I don't care of this job at all, it is simply broken - these people want override to stick
  2. I have reviewed the results and they are not problematic (like, will be fixed later). But HEAD move makes these results obsolete, you may get new ones.

I'm not saying we should do nothing, but accommodating use case 1 too much incentives repos to have broken jobs and not fix them or disable them? Or maybe we need to distinguish a sticky override and normal one. I'm not sure.

@dhaiducek
Copy link
Contributor Author

Those are fair points, and if the HEAD of the target branch changed, I agree it does seem it would make sense for Tide to retry the job before merging the PR.

Would it make a difference if the job it re-ran is a required job that's set to always_run: false? I guess my preference would be to reset the override and not retry the job to let the user determine whether it should be run or overridden again? (And maybe post a comment to that effect?)

@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Dec 5, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants