Project

General

Profile

action #91878

coordination #39719: [saga][epic] Detection of "known failures" for stable tests, easy test results review and easy tracking of known issues

coordination #19720: [epic] Simplify investigation of job failures

Improve git log entries in failed test investigation

Added by ybonatakis 3 months ago. Updated about 15 hours ago.

Status:
In Progress
Priority:
Low
Assignee:
Category:
Feature requests
Target version:
Start date:
2021-04-27
Due date:
% Done:

0%

Estimated time:
Difficulty:

Description

As for now the investigation shows commits and the files that changed separately.
I believe this would be more useful if files' changes were represented below each commit such us know what changed what.
So for instance test_diff_stat and test_log could be one entity.


Related issues

Related to openQA Project - action #92731: clickable git log entries in investigation tabWorkable

History

#1 Updated by okurz 3 months ago

  • Subject changed from [OpenQA] Improve failed test investigation to Improve failed test investigation
  • Due date set to 2021-05-27
  • Status changed from New to Feedback
  • Assignee set to okurz
  • Priority changed from Normal to Low
  • Target version set to future

Hi, thanks for the ticket. So, instead of separate log+diff you would prefer a mixed git log with details. I guess personal preferences differ here. Do you know that others would prefer the same? I doubt that the mixed log is easier to read by users.

#2 Updated by ybonatakis 3 months ago

okurz wrote:

Hi, thanks for the ticket. So, instead of separate log+diff you would prefer a mixed git log with details. I guess personal preferences differ here. Do you know that others would prefer the same? I doubt that the mixed log is easier to read by users.

i do not know about others. I dont even know how many they use them or how.
IMO it is a clearer investigation approach because you can see which commit changes what files that it might cause the problem. Also with good comments is easier to walk through the commits and see what was merged with all the context in one look. Otherwise you have to go first in one panel see what files are changed and then go find the corresponding commit. Until this time you miss the description of the commit to see if it is relavant. And the other way around.

#3 Updated by okurz 3 months ago

We discussed this in the SUSE QE Tools Workshop 2021-05-14 as well. We see it as a viable alternative to make the git hash clickable, e.g. pointing to the corresponding github view for the git hash.

#4 Updated by ybonatakis 3 months ago

okurz wrote:

We discussed this in the SUSE QE Tools Workshop 2021-05-14 as well. We see it as a viable alternative to make the git hash clickable, e.g. pointing to the corresponding github view for the git hash.

or both? i see this as a interchangeable and interdependent enhancement

#5 Updated by okurz 3 months ago

sure, we can try both. So far I have not heard or read from anyone else that they would think the approach of combined log+stat as necessary but maybe you want to give it a try yourself in openQA code around the code in https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/blob/master/lib/OpenQA/Schema/Result/Jobs.pm#L1987 ? I can't make promises if we want to accept such PR but we can try to discuss over code rather just english text :)

#6 Updated by okurz 3 months ago

  • Parent task set to #19720

#7 Updated by okurz 3 months ago

  • Subject changed from Improve failed test investigation to Improve git log entries in failed test investigation
  • Due date deleted (2021-05-27)
  • Status changed from Feedback to Workable
  • Assignee deleted (okurz)

I split out the "clickable git log entries" into #92731 . ybonatakis as stated, you are welcome to give it a try. Within SUSE QE Tools we need to postpone the feature a bit.

#8 Updated by ybonatakis about 1 month ago

  • Assignee set to ybonatakis

#9 Updated by ybonatakis about 1 month ago

okurz wrote:

sure, we can try both. So far I have not heard or read from anyone else that they would think the approach of combined log+stat as necessary but maybe you want to give it a try yourself in openQA code around the code in https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/blob/master/lib/OpenQA/Schema/Result/Jobs.pm#L1987 ? I can't make promises if we want to accept such PR but we can try to discuss over code rather just english text :)

https://github.com/os-autoinst/openQA/pull/3993 talk time :)

#10 Updated by ybonatakis about 1 month ago

  • Status changed from Workable to Feedback

#11 Updated by cdywan about 15 hours ago

  • Status changed from Feedback to In Progress

I suspect this should be in progress as there's a very nice looking PR under review

#12 Updated by cdywan about 15 hours ago

  • Related to action #92731: clickable git log entries in investigation tab added

Also available in: Atom PDF