[BUG]: Bazel tests won't run on develop CI #5407
Assignees
Labels
bug
End user-perceivable behaviors which are not desirable.
Impact: High
High perceived user impact (breaks a critical feature or blocks a release).
Priority: Essential
This work item must be completed for its milestone.
Work: Medium
The means to find the solution is clear, but it isn't at good-first-issue level yet.
Comments
BenHenning
added
bug
BenHenning
added
Priority: Essential
BenHenning
moved this from Todo
to In Progress
in [Team] Developer Workflow & Infrastructure - Android
github-project-automation
bot
moved this to Todo
in [Team] Developer Workflow & Infrastructure - Android
6 tasks
BenHenning
added a commit
that referenced
this issue
May 23, 2024
## Explanation Fixes #5407 This introduces a proper fallback for the base branch used for computing affected tests when off-develop: ``origin/develop`` (which was the same base used prior to #4929 being merged). This can't easily be verified without being merged, but I have high confidence it'll work since we've used the JavaScript ``||`` fallback syntax in GitHub workflow ``if`` conditionals in the past (and the environment should be the same for ``env`` variables). Note that this is being fixed forward rather than reverted because the only verification is merging the PR, so it's actually faster and simpler to fix forward than to revert the original PR and re-submit a fix (which has the same likelihood of fixing CI as this fix forward). ## Essential Checklist - [x] The PR title and explanation each start with "Fix #bugnum: " (If this PR fixes part of an issue, prefix the title with "Fix part of #bugnum: ...".) - [x] Any changes to [scripts/assets](https://github.com/oppia/oppia-android/tree/develop/scripts/assets) files have their rationale included in the PR explanation. - [x] The PR follows the [style guide](https://github.com/oppia/oppia-android/wiki/Coding-style-guide). - [x] The PR does not contain any unnecessary code changes from Android Studio ([reference](https://github.com/oppia/oppia-android/wiki/Guidance-on-submitting-a-PR#undo-unnecessary-changes)). - [x] The PR is made from a branch that's **not** called "develop" and is up-to-date with "develop". - [x] The PR is **assigned** to the appropriate reviewers ([reference](https://github.com/oppia/oppia-android/wiki/Guidance-on-submitting-a-PR#clarification-regarding-assignees-and-reviewers-section)). ## For UI-specific PRs only N/A -- This only affects CI infrastructure.
github-project-automation
bot
moved this from In Progress
to Done
in [Team] Developer Workflow & Infrastructure - Android
|
Looks like everything is fixed now. Env in latest develop CI run: And everything passed: https://github.com/oppia/oppia-android/actions/runs/9212567763/job/25344491603. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Describe the bug
#4929 introduced functional fixes for the
ComputeAffectedTestsscript, and these seem to work fine in CI except for thedevelopbranch which is now failing: see failure for 24b1721:Steps To Reproduce
This isn't easy to repro because it seems that, from the error, the underlying problem has to do with how we now compute the base_commit_hash variable:
there is no
pull_requestwhen running CI outside of a PR's CI runs so it seems this SHA value is actually empty. This can be reproed approximately by running the command as though it were empty:(Notice the two spaces between the arguments).
This can only be reasonably verified by submitting a fix and ensuring that the CI run now passes.
Expected Behavior
CI runs should always run & pass on develop.
Screenshots/Videos
No response
What device/emulator are you using?
No response
Which Android version is your device/emulator running?
No response
Which version of the Oppia Android app are you using?
No response
Additional Context
It's not worth reverting #4929 since it's introducing an issue that only affects fully submitted PRs (meaning a fix-forward has the same likelihood of fixing/breaking develop as a revert + fix, but it requires less reviewing & merging and thus can hopefully be fixed more quickly).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: