-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 36.6k
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
lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in commit message linter #19654
Conversation
Related: travis-ci/travis-ci#4596 |
Concept ACK on not relying on |
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.
ACK
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.
ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged.
a91ab86 lint: Use TRAVIS_BRANCH in lint-git-commit-check.sh (Fabian Jahr) c11dc99 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in whitespace linter (Fabian Jahr) 1b41ce8 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE for commit-script-check (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: This is causing problems again, very similar to bitcoin#19654. UPDATE: This now removes all remaining usages of TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE and instead uses TRAVIS_BRANCH for the range, including `lint-git-commit-check` where TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE had already been removed. For builds triggered by a pull request, TRAVIS_BRANCH is the name of the branch targeted by the pull request. In the linters there is still a fallback that assumes master as the target branch. ACKs for top commit: sipa: ACK a91ab86. See test I tried in bitcoin#20075. Tree-SHA512: 1378bdebd5d8787a83fbda5d9999cc9447209423e7f0218fe5eb240e6a32dc1b51d1cd53b4f8cd1f71574d935ac5e22e203dfe09cce17e9976a48416038e1263
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out
TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE
which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR.I think we rather want to use something like
git merge-base
to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so themerge-base
range should be used there by default.