Project

General

Profile

Actions

action #151831

closed

coordination #151822: [epic] Soft-fails mitigation

Revisit soft-failure bsc#1190711

Added by JERiveraMoya 6 months ago. Updated 4 months ago.

Status:
Resolved
Priority:
Normal
Target version:
-
Start date:
2023-12-01
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:

Description

Motivation

See parent epic.
https://openqa.suse.de/tests/12837013#step/release_notes_from_url/7 -> bsc#1190711

Acceptance criteria

AC1: Revisit soft-failure bsc#1190711


Related issues 1 (0 open1 closed)

Related to qe-yam - action #151840: Revisit soft-failure bsc#1214197Resolvedtinawang1232023-12-01

Actions
Actions #1

Updated by JERiveraMoya 6 months ago

  • Tags set to qe-yam-dec-sprint
Actions #2

Updated by leli 5 months ago

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress
  • Assignee set to leli
Actions #3

Updated by leli 5 months ago

Now we need wait developer's reply in https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190711#c9 for 'when should be expected this release notes via URL for the scenario to succeed', then we can decide how to do for this soft-failure.

Actions #4

Updated by JERiveraMoya 5 months ago

leli wrote in #note-3:

Now we need wait developer's reply in https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190711#c9 for 'when should be expected this release notes via URL for the scenario to succeed', then we can decide how to do for this soft-failure.

Developer didn't respond since Feb, please, read again the epic, the goal is to take some actions not to wait, you need to chase the problem or understand the problem and justify why give up in the worst case.

Actions #5

Updated by JERiveraMoya 5 months ago

  • Tags changed from qe-yam-dec-sprint, qe-yam-jan-sprint to qe-yam-jan-sprint
Actions #6

Updated by leli 5 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Workable
  • Assignee deleted (leli)

Please refer to https://suse.slack.com/archives/C02CLB2LB7Z/p1704179087246679 for suggestions and info for this ticket.

Currently I will continue contact Rado for Stefan's suggestion in https://bugzilla.suse.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1190711#c3 which will update the release note for the product string even in early stage, test code won't need change and test will pass consistently, but need wait...

Another thing is to detect somehow the develpment phase we are, so before RC the test passes with RPM and after RC it fails (no soft-failure).
we will do check always, just rpm from RC and url after, so we can create a more urgent bug that will not be neglected.

Actions #7

Updated by leli 4 months ago

Actions #8

Updated by syrianidou_sofia 4 months ago

  • Status changed from Workable to In Progress
  • Assignee set to syrianidou_sofia
Actions #9

Updated by syrianidou_sofia 4 months ago

After discussing, we figured out that we can use the build title to provide information whether the build is RC and BETA variable to check if it's GMC.
PR: https://github.com/os-autoinst/os-autoinst-distri-opensuse/pull/18441

Actions #10

Updated by syrianidou_sofia 4 months ago ยท Edited

Module passes successfully by only recording an error: https://openqa.suse.de/tests/13332712#step/release_notes_from_url/9

Actions #11

Updated by syrianidou_sofia 4 months ago

  • Status changed from In Progress to Resolved

Now the test

Actions

Also available in: Atom PDF