-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 22
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
Propagate master only when analysis changes #206
Propagate master only when analysis changes #206
Conversation
Yes this is a much better fix! Thanks :) |
and> meta = Current.Analysis.metadata x in | ||
Result.iter (fun x -> prev := Ok x, meta) x; |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There seem to be some issues here. The metadata and the state aren't in sync which can cause problem:
Here is the log (and previous working logs): https://opam-repo-ci.ci3.ocamllabs.io/job/2023-01-30/183948-opam-ci-analyse-9093d6
service/pipeline.ml
Outdated
Analyse.examine ~master src | ||
|> Current.cutoff (* keep the old master if the analysis hasn't changed *) | ||
~eq:(fun (_, old_analysis) (_, new_analysis) -> | ||
Analyse.Analysis.equal old_analysis new_analysis) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think I'm seeing something rather annoying with this change.
The old behaviour is:
- if a PR fails with something unrelated
- and we open and merge a new PR to fix those unrelated issues
- we expect the new master commit to be used when clicking the rebuild button on the first PR
However with this change it seems that the old master commit remain and thus the change isn't taken into account.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
fixed
5575d4c
to
9854379
Compare
9854379
to
1513f43
Compare
Tested successfully (so far) live |
Alternative to #204 cc @art-w
We just have to wait for ocurrent/ocurrent#330 to be merged and this is good to go.
Already being tested in production.