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.

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

Migrate to org.fedoraproject.prod.pagure.git.receive #2351

Merged

Conversation

lbarcziova
Copy link
Member

@lbarcziova lbarcziova commented Feb 16, 2024

Supersedes #2303

Related to #2305


RELEASE NOTES BEGIN
N/A
RELEASE NOTES END

@lbarcziova lbarcziova requested a review from nforro February 16, 2024 07:22
if not self.contains_specfile_change():
return False

if self.pull_request:
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@nforro as you mentioned, there is no way to tell from the message whether the commit(s) is coming from PR, do you think it is ok to always try to get the PR via end_commit or do you have some other suggestions?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we have a choice. But I think this has to be adjusted as well:

if not self._pull_request and self.data.event_dict["committer"] == "pagure":

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't think we have a choice.

there is still option to revisit the 2 config options, but that would require changes in configs for users who use these options

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I was wondering if it still makes sense to differentiate between the two events. But we need to be able to recognize Packit PRs, and the person making the push (agent) is not packit, e.g.: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/datagrepper/v2/id?id=a934e891-c91c-4d7e-b287-3d7ef6771f8f&is_raw=true&size=extra-large.

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 I know, therefore I wrote it would require changes in the configs (I meant having only one option, for the committer, but the default could not be packit and would be more complicated). I will go with the current implementation and if we notice some problems with this, we can revisit.

Copy link
Contributor

@lbarcziova lbarcziova force-pushed the fedmsg-receive-migrate branch from c9804c4 to 00c94d1 Compare February 16, 2024 08:24
Copy link
Contributor

The check for changed specfile is now again done only
in fedmsg as the message now directly contains always the info
about changed files. The agent for PR is now not equal to
`pagure`, so we cannot rely to check on that and need to try
to get the PR via the commit SHA.
@lbarcziova lbarcziova force-pushed the fedmsg-receive-migrate branch from 00c94d1 to 8a8d1e1 Compare February 16, 2024 10:13
Copy link
Contributor

@lbarcziova lbarcziova added the mergeit When set, zuul wil gate and merge the PR. label Feb 16, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

Build succeeded (gate pipeline).
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/9918bcb468384d37acad2e784593247c

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 2m 03s

@softwarefactory-project-zuul softwarefactory-project-zuul bot merged commit bd38a84 into packit:main Feb 16, 2024
3 checks passed
@lbarcziova lbarcziova deleted the fedmsg-receive-migrate branch February 16, 2024 10:32
lbarcziova added a commit to packit/deployment that referenced this pull request Feb 19, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
mergeit When set, zuul wil gate and merge the PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants