On 15. 6. 2022, at 11:25, Yedidyah Bar David <didi@redhat.com> 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?
huh, I wondered about that same thing today.... Thank you for explaining why I couldn't find that hash anywhere
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).
We should create ovirt-github-rants@ovirt.org, I'd certainly contribute:-) It's amazing how horrible _and_ popular github is.
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.
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?
It should be easy to change, using [2]:
- uses: actions/checkout@v2 with: ref: ${{ github.event.pull_request.head.sha }}
No need to reach a complete consensus - can be decided upon per-project/repo.
github is always quite horrible to maintain some consistency across projects...yeah, I'd really like to have the same approach for every single project, it simplifies the maintenace....we do have a lot of projects and many are not very active and they easily fall behind. After all we have 160 projects in oVirt org but only ~30 are active....or rather 30 are in use for oVirt compose and ~10 are active. +1 on using it everywhere we have our own action for rpms and buildcontainer for unified build environment (with a shameful exception of vdsm!)....it's probably overkill for checkout to use oVirt's action
But if you disagree, I'd like to understand why. Thanks.
Best regards,
[1] https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/runs/6881311961?check_suite_focus=true
[2] https://github.com/marketplace/actions/checkout?version=v2.4.2#checkout-pull...
[3] https://github.com/oVirt/vdsm/pull/249 -- Didi _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list -- devel@ovirt.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@ovirt.org 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/devel@ovirt.org/message/7SEFKOASOATTMO...