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

lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in commit message linter #19654

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2020

Conversation

fjahr
Copy link
Contributor

@fjahr fjahr commented Aug 4, 2020

#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.

@fjahr fjahr changed the title lint: Improve commit message linter in Travis lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in commit message linter Aug 4, 2020
@hebasto
Copy link
Member

hebasto commented Aug 4, 2020

Related: travis-ci/travis-ci#4596

@hebasto
Copy link
Member

hebasto commented Aug 4, 2020

Concept ACK on not relying on TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE.

Copy link
Member

@maflcko maflcko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ACK

Copy link
Member

@hebasto hebasto left a 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.

@maflcko maflcko merged commit 65e4eca into bitcoin:master Aug 5, 2020
ryanofsky added a commit to ryanofsky/home that referenced this pull request Aug 13, 2020
maflcko pushed a commit to maflcko/bitcoin-core that referenced this pull request Oct 4, 2020
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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jun 27, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jun 28, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jun 29, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jul 1, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jul 15, 2021
…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
PastaPastaPasta pushed a commit to PastaPastaPasta/dash that referenced this pull request Jul 16, 2021
…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
@bitcoin bitcoin locked as resolved and limited conversation to collaborators Feb 15, 2022
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants