QA (public) » openQA Project (public)

cdywan wrote:

• Log files tend to be gone after 3 days or so, which might be fine because bugs should be handled by then. Although uploading log files to bugs is recommended since otherwise the issue can't be investigated

can you provide examples of such jobs because that shouldn't really be the case that log files vanish after three days already.

• Idea, maybe jobs with open bugs should generally be archived?

Well, that should be in place already considering
http://open.qa/docs/#_referer_settings_to_auto_mark_important_jobs
meaning that for any openQA job where an openQA job URL is referenced and someone clicks the openQA URL from that external reference, e.g. from the bugzilla bug report, then the job will be marked with "label:linked" which should mark the job as "important"

openQA has the concept of important jobs and more recently the ability to archive important jobs.

I noticed this wasn't a part of the workflow described to me. So I wanted to test it out, and I'm not sure if it actually works 🤔️

• https://openqa.opensuse.org/group_overview/24?only_tagged=1 doesn't show my tagged test job
• https://openqa.suse.de/group_overview/414?only_tagged=1 doesn't show my tagged test job
• I can't see any indication in the job that the tag is any more than an arbitrary comment

There seems to be quite some confusion with wording. You can only tag builds, not jobs, see http://open.qa/docs/#build_tagging . What you did in https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/2234385#comments is effectively write a plain comment because the keyword "tag" does not have any special meaning within a job comment. What we could do is mark the keyword "tag" in plain openQA comments and provide some kind of "help text" like Clippy in Microsoft Office to remind people that maybe they tried to achieve something different and that this does not work here :)

cdywan wrote:

There seems to be quite some confusion with wording. You can only tag builds, not jobs, see http://open.qa/docs/#build_tagging . What you did in https://openqa.opensuse.org/tests/2234385#comments is effectively write a plain comment because the keyword "tag" does not have any special meaning within a job comment. What we could do is mark the keyword "tag" in plain openQA comments and provide some kind of "help text" like Clippy in Microsoft Office to remind people that maybe they tried to achieve something different and that this does not work here :)

My confusion might be that the docs talk about "important jobs" in several places, yet it's not clear how to identify them or make them important. Examples of what would help me:

• Do xy to mark a job as important.
• Observe the xy which tells you that the job is considered important.

Ok, good ideas how to improve the descriptions as visible in the webUI as well as the documentation

My user story is really is this: I want to retain the assets of this job

Do you mean "assets" as in the openQA definition of assets meaning isos, qcow files, etc.? Or do you mean logs+results?

So the next task that would need to be done is to explicitly describe in our documentation how one can mark jobs as "important". In #65271#note-91 I have reported the idea to make important jobs visible as such in the webUI. http://open.qa/docs/#_referer_settings_to_auto_mark_important_jobs already mentions that jobs can be marked as important manually but does not explain how.