Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

TEP-0114: Bring Retries and RetriesStatus back #5765

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2022
Merged

TEP-0114: Bring Retries and RetriesStatus back #5765

merged 1 commit into from
Nov 18, 2022

Conversation

XinruZhang
Copy link
Member

@XinruZhang XinruZhang commented Nov 16, 2022 •
edited
Loading

Changes

Prior to this PR, we excluded the Retries and RetriesStatus (in #5662, #5662) because we were not sure what decisions would be make in TEP-0121, Now that we've decided to keep both in TEP-0121, we can safely release Custom Task Beta with them.

/kind feature

Submitter Checklist

As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:

  • Has Docs included if any changes are user facing
  • Has Tests included if any functionality added or changed
  • Follows the commit message standard
  • Meets the Tekton contributor standards (including
    functionality, content, code)
  • Has a kind label. You can add one by adding a comment on this PR that contains /kind <type>. Valid types are bug, cleanup, design, documentation, feature, flake, misc, question, tep
  • Release notes block below has been updated with any user facing changes (API changes, bug fixes, changes requiring upgrade notices or deprecation warnings)
  • Release notes contains the string "action required" if the change requires additional action from users switching to the new release

Release Notes

NONE

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. labels Nov 16, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. label Nov 16, 2022
@XinruZhang
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @jerop

@XinruZhang XinruZhang force-pushed the TEP-0114-bring-back-retries branch from 4ed9f81 to 57f9a78 Compare November 16, 2022 14:18
jerop
jerop reviewed Nov 16, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@jerop jerop left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

please run hack/update-codegen.sh

@XinruZhang
Copy link
Member Author

Thanks @jerop. Yeah I did run that script but no idea why it doesn't take affect, looking into it

@XinruZhang XinruZhang force-pushed the TEP-0114-bring-back-retries branch 3 times, most recently from 4fe3468 to 6098c27 Compare November 17, 2022 14:25
@XinruZhang XinruZhang mentioned this pull request Nov 17, 2022
Closed
@chuangw6
Copy link
Member

we might need to revert ../register.go files to pass the built test.

@XinruZhang
Bring Retries and RetriesStatus back
d341ee0 
Prior to this commit, we excluded the `Retries` and `RetriesStatus`
because we were not sure what decisions would be make in TEP-0121,
Now that we've decided to keep both in TEP-0121, we can safely
release Custom Task Beta with them.
@XinruZhang XinruZhang force-pushed the TEP-0114-bring-back-retries branch from 6098c27 to d341ee0 Compare November 17, 2022 17:34
@XinruZhang
Copy link
Member Author

Tests are fixed! @afrittoli PTAL~

afrittoli
afrittoli reviewed Nov 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
test/artifact_bucket_test.go
Comment on lines -150 to +152
value: https://github.com/pivotal-nader-ziada/gohelloworld
value: https://github.com/pivotal-nader-ziada/gohelloworld
- name: Revision
value: master
value: master
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this a lint failure? I wonder why it popped up in this PR?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Yes indeed it's wierd. it failed becaues YAML file parsing error. I fixed it by converting tab indents to space indents.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

yeah the old value looks improperly indented

afrittoli
afrittoli reviewed Nov 18, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@afrittoli afrittoli left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What's the plan for documentation on CustomRuns?

@XinruZhang
Copy link
Member Author

What's the plan for documentation on CustomRuns?

I updated this PR #5677 to merge the doc.

@abayer
Copy link
Contributor

abayer commented Nov 18, 2022

/approve

@tekton-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: abayer

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 18, 2022
@bendory
Copy link
Contributor

bendory commented Nov 18, 2022

looks good!

@Yongxuanzhang
Copy link
Member

Do we have a previous PR to remove the retrie? If so can we link it in the description?
Otherwise /lgtm

@dibyom
Copy link
Member

dibyom commented Nov 18, 2022

/lgtm

@tekton-robot tekton-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 18, 2022
@tekton-robot tekton-robot merged commit 96d38d5 into tektoncd:main Nov 18, 2022
@jerop jerop changed the title Bring Retries and RetriesStatus back TEP-0114: Bring Retries and RetriesStatus back Nov 28, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@jerop jerop jerop left review comments

@afrittoli afrittoli afrittoli left review comments

@dibyom dibyom Awaiting requested review from dibyom

Assignees

@dibyom dibyom

@jerop jerop

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesnt merit a release note. size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
9 participants
@XinruZhang @chuangw6 @abayer @tekton-robot @bendory @Yongxuanzhang @dibyom @afrittoli @jerop