action #63565
closedThe extra setting is added to the new job when cloning a job
0%
Description
Observation¶
When cloning a job use clone_job.pl, the setting with + defined in Medium Types (such as +ISO=xxx.iso) will be added into the job's setting, although it does not affect the job.
Here is an example: https://openqa.suse.de/tests/3795703#settings
Steps to reproduce¶
- Add a new setting (e.g +ISO=xxx ) to an exist Medium Types.
- clone a job with above Medium Types.
- The new settings
Problem¶
The settings +ISO=xxx should not be added to the job's setting.
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
- Copied from action #62219: jobs post does not support to trigger a test suite that is defined in YAML with a new alias added
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
- Has duplicate action #63562: The extra setting is added to the new job when cloning a job added
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
Where can I find the clone source job and the cloned ones where the new setting would appear? https://openqa.suse.de/tests/3795703 doesn't tell me if it was cloned or is the source of a clone.
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
okurz wrote:
Where can I find the clone source job and the cloned ones where the new setting would appear? https://openqa.suse.de/tests/3795703 doesn't tell me if it was cloned or is the source of a clone.
The clone source job is https://10.160.0.207/tests/3767674#settings . job #3795703 was cloned based on job #3767674. you could see that in https://openqa.suse.de/tests/3795703#settings there is a setting '+ISO=SLE-15-SP2-Online-x86_64-Build122.1-Media1.iso'.
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
ok but wasn't that a feature you added with https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2083 ? The according ticket was #20464
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
- Related to action #63883: openqa-clone-job does not support removing an unuseful setting added
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
okurz wrote:
ok but wasn't that a feature you added with https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2083 ? The according ticket was #20464
Sorry I forgot to update this ticket. Yes, I added this feature before, and I did not consider this situation when I did it.
Updated by livdywan almost 5 years ago
Can this ticket be considered resolved now?
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from New to Resolved
- Assignee set to Xiaojing_liu
cdywan wrote:
Can this ticket be considered resolved now?
yes, I think so.
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
Xiaojing_liu wrote:
cdywan wrote:
Can this ticket be considered resolved now?
yes, I think so.
Related PR had been merged. https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2861
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
Please keep in mind that it's a good practice to only resolve a ticket after verifying it works on one of our production instances, e.g. o3 after daily deployment. Maybe you did that already
Updated by Xiaojing_liu almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from Resolved to Feedback
okurz wrote:
Please keep in mind that it's a good practice to only resolve a ticket after verifying it works on one of our production instances, e.g. o3 after daily deployment. Maybe you did that already
I do not do that in o3. I update the status to 'Feedback'. I plan to verify it on OSD after it is deployed.
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
Well that would take a week then with our current schedule of (only) weekly deployments. You can keep it at Resolved, no problem, just a reminder in general :)
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
#64938 seems to have been confirmed as regression due to your PR, reverted in https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2874 . Please try to bring in the PR again while testing for the problem as reported in #64938
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
- Related to action #64938: '+ISO=' in test suite breaks a number of tests added
Updated by okurz almost 5 years ago
Remotely related is your PR https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2877 which seems to be a fix for https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/2870 which I merged now to fix an urgent problem in production. However I would greatly appreciate if you can ensure we have proper tests to cover the regression we encountered.
Updated by livdywan almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from Feedback to In Progress
- Target version set to Current Sprint
Updated by livdywan almost 5 years ago
- Status changed from In Progress to Feedback
gh#os-autoinst/openQA#2877 was merged