On Wed, Aug 17, 2022 at 3:33 PM Yedidyah Bar David <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Tue, Aug 16, 2022 at 11:30 AM Michal Skrivanek <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 11. 8. 2022, at 8:24, Yedidyah Bar David <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 5:04 PM Scott Dickerson <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 21, 2022 at 9:35 AM Michal Skrivanek <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 21. 7. 2022, at 9:09, Yedidyah Bar David <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 11:30 AM Martin Perina <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Jul 8, 2022 at 10:27 AM Michal Skrivanek <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On 7. 7. 2022, at 19:28, Nir Soffer <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 12:26 PM Yedidyah Bar David <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I was annoyed for some time now by the fact that when I used some
>> github-CI-generated RPMs, with a git hash in their names, I could
>> never find this git hash anywhere - not in my local git repo, nor in
>> github. Why is it so? Because, if I got it right, the default for
>> 'actions/checkout@v2' is to merge the PR HEAD with the branch HEAD.
>> See e.g. [1]:
>>
>>   HEAD is now at 7bbb40c9a Merge
>> 026bb9c672bf46786dd6d16f4cbe0ecfa84c531d into
>> 35e217936b5571e9657946b47333a563373047bb
>>
>> Meaning: my patch was 026bb9c, master was 35e2179, and the generated
>> RPMs will have 7bbb40c9a, not to be found anywhere else. If you check
>> the main PR page [3], you can find there '026bb9c', but not
>> '7bbb40c9a'.
>>
>> (Even 026bb9c might require some effort, e.g. "didib force-pushed the
>> add-hook-log-console branch 2 times, most recently from c90e658 to
>> 66ebc88 yesterday". I guess this is the result of github discouraging
>> force-pushes, in direct opposite of gerrit, which had a notion of
>> different patchsets for a single change. I already ranted about this
>> in the past, but that's not the subject of the current message).
>>
>> This is not just an annoyance, it's a real difference in semantics. In
>> gerrit/jenkins days, IIRC most/all projects I worked on, ran CI
>> testing/building on the pushed HEAD, and didn't touch it. Rebase, if
>> at all, happened either explicitly, or at merge time.
>>
>>
>> I don't think that the action *rebases* the pr, it uses a merge commit
>> but this adds newer commits on master on top of the pr, which may
>> conflict or change the semantics of the pr.
>>
>> actions/checkout's default, to auto-merge, is probably meant to be
>> more "careful" - to test what would happen if the code is merged. I
>> agree this makes sense. But I personally think it's almost always ok
>> to test on the pushed HEAD and not rebase/merge _implicitely_.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
>> I agree, this is unexpected and unwanted behavior in particular for
>> projects that disable merge commits (e.g. vdsm).
>>
>>
>> merge commits are disabled for all oVirt projects as per
>> https://www.ovirt.org/develop/developer-guide/migrating_to_github.html
>>
>>
>> It should be easy to change, using [2]:
>>
>> - uses: actions/checkout@v2
>> with:
>>   ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}
>>
>>
>> we can really just create a trivial wrapper and replace globally with e.g.
>> - uses: ovirt/checkout
>>
>>
>>
>> +1
>>
>> As this needs to be included in each project separately, then I'd say
>> let's minimize available options to ensure maximum consistency across all
>> oVirt projects
>>
>>
>>
>> 1. I don't know how, and would have to learn quite a bit of github, to do
>> this. That's the main reason I neglected this in my TODO folder and didn't
>> reply yet. Perhaps someone already did something similar and would like to
>> take over?
>>
>>
>> Take a look at https://github.com/oVirt/upload-rpms-action
>> minus tests (I hope Janos is not looking)...that makes it a new repo, and
>> license, readme, and yaml file with that snippet. that's it.
>>
>>
>> I am hesitant about the value of this exercise, but with Martin's
>> encouragement decided to try, and it seems to work indeed:
>>
>> https://github.com/didib/checkout-head-sha
>> https://github.com/didib/test-checkout/pull/2
>>
>> Check the output of 'git log' in the check - it shows the PR hash.
>>
>> So please create a repo (e.g. oVirt/checkout or whatever) and I'll
>> push a PR there.
>>
>>
>> https://github.com/oVirt/checkout-action
>> you have Write permissions there
>>
>
> Pushed and merged a single PR [1], updated my test repo to use it [2],
> tested it [3], seems ok.
>
> [1] https://github.com/oVirt/checkout-action/pull/1
> [2]
> https://github.com/didib/test-checkout/commit/6d188ae88b8a58bde16d6a537123be9b90c14e0b
> [3] https://github.com/didib/test-checkout/pull/3
>

Also pushed:

https://github.com/oVirt/otopi/pull/30
https://github.com/oVirt/ovirt-engine/pull/595


>
>
>>
>>
>> Didn't add test code :-).
>>
>>
>>
>> 2. I already pushed (2 weeks ago) and merged (yesterday) to otopi, [1],
>> which simply does the above.
>>
>> 3. Scott now pushed [2], to the engine, doing the same, and I agree with
>> him. So am going to merge it soon, unless there are objections. If
>> eventually someone creates an oVirt action for this, we can always update
>> to use it.
>>
>>
>> And just to add a bit more fuel to the fire: back in the old days when
>> jenkins was running CI for ovirt-web-ui, there were more hoops to jump
>> through to get the PR head commit instead of the PR merge commit when
>> running builds.  My solution there, and that still works with the github
>> actions, is:
>> https://github.com/oVirt/ovirt-web-ui/blob/3903152852dc8a9d44484cbdc5c80de45774f090/automation/build.sh#L23-L33
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>>
>> [1] https://github.com/oVirt/otopi/pull/25
>>
>> [2] https://github.com/oVirt/ovirt-engine/pull/543
>>
>>
>> I merged this yesterday, while starting writing my current reply but
>> before deciding to try the above :-). Can change later.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Didi
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
> Didi
>


-- 
Didi
_______________________________________________
Devel mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
Privacy Statement: https://www.ovirt.org/privacy-policy.html
oVirt Code of Conduct: 
https://www.ovirt.org/community/about/community-guidelines/
List Archives: 
https://lists.ovirt.org/archives/list/[email protected]/message/ZSM6RARX6NGVPBMZD2LBA4IJLOVRLW5Z/

Reply via email to