Skip to content

Conversation

dnestoro
Copy link
Member

@dnestoro dnestoro commented Sep 10, 2025

What does this PR do?

Implements: #672

Implementation details

Note: I've changed the workflow trigger mechanism. From now on, it can only be triggered manually.

@dnestoro dnestoro linked an issue Sep 10, 2025 that may be closed by this pull request
@dnestoro dnestoro self-assigned this Sep 10, 2025
@dnestoro dnestoro force-pushed the dnestoro/run-all-new-versions-tests-at-once branch from 02da616 to 0d0e042 Compare September 12, 2025 14:11
@dnestoro dnestoro requested a review from vjovanov September 12, 2025 14:36
@dnestoro dnestoro marked this pull request as ready for review September 12, 2025 14:36
@dnestoro dnestoro requested a review from a team as a code owner September 12, 2025 14:36
@dnestoro dnestoro requested review from wirthi and olpaw September 12, 2025 14:36
@dnestoro dnestoro force-pushed the dnestoro/run-all-new-versions-tests-at-once branch from 0d0e042 to bb4c66c Compare September 12, 2025 14:43
@dnestoro dnestoro force-pushed the dnestoro/run-all-new-versions-tests-at-once branch 3 times, most recently from 19debd3 to 4754d8d Compare September 17, 2025 13:39
name: "📋 Get list of all supported libraries with newer versions"
permissions: write-all
runs-on: "ubuntu-22.04"
if: github.repository == 'oracle/graalvm-reachability-metadata'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why do we need this? What if I fork this repo?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Previously this workflow was scheduled for execution every two weeks, and therefore we didn't want this to be executed every two weeks on user's forks (we would spend their repo resources that way). We can remove it now if necessary, but I don't see a reason why this job should be executed anywhere else than in this repo.

Copy link
Member

@vjovanov vjovanov Sep 22, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Interesting, just leave it as a comment. Is this standard practice?

Will this prevent me from running this task manually on my fork, and should it?

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, that will prevent you from running this workflow on your fork (that is the purpose of this). As long as this is not a scheduled, but manually triggered job, we can remove this line. If we decide to make it scheduled at some point, I will keep this line.

@vjovanov
Copy link
Member

Why not run this every week, after the initial manual run?

@dnestoro
Copy link
Member Author

Why not run this every week, after the initial manual run?

Once we establish a quick way for fixing many tests at once, we can make this scheduled. Until then, running tests every week, while we only fixed 1 or 2 tests, will just tell us that we have same failures every week (while we spend so much resources doing that). So in my opinion, that is something for TODO list here. Once we have proper way of bulk fixing tests, we can easily make this job scheduled.

@vjovanov
Copy link
Member

Why not save the information about the failing builds in the repo so we don't re-run them?

Then we can schedule every week to pick up the new versions that are passing.

@dnestoro dnestoro force-pushed the dnestoro/run-all-new-versions-tests-at-once branch from b361edb to 24ada51 Compare September 26, 2025 14:22
@dnestoro
Copy link
Member Author

Update:

  • Added retry logic
  • Instead of keeping information about previous failures in additional file, I used the fact that we create tickets when we have failures. So before we trigger new tests run for some library, we will check if there is an existing issue for that library and the first version we want to test (implementation). In case there is a ticket for the library mentioning that the failing version is the same as the first one we want to run again => we will skip the test. cc @vjovanov
  • The workflow is now scheduled for execution once a week

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Run all jobs for testing new libraries versions
2 participants