Commit Graph

13 Commits

Author SHA1 Message Date
Xavier Morel
cea1b62ac2 [FIX] runbot_merge: commit messages should be trimmed indeed
Reverts commit 85a7890023 which
untrimmed the commits: while it's *probably* true that git and
github's APIs differ in their treatment of whitespace (in that git
pretty much always terminates the commit message with a newline while
github does not, as far as I understand, though I didn't really
validate it) the issue was that github also trims on *output* when
fetching over the API, something the fake did not do.

So rather than update the test data I should have fixed the fake, but
I failed to realise that at the time. I only realised when I decided
to re-run against github actual (something I rarely do anymore as it's
painfully slow) and it went on to choke on every message I'd updated.
2024-01-16 10:51:37 +01:00
Xavier Morel
65ed7c51bc [IMP] *: note to merge using mergebot in conflict message
The message has a lot of info, but left the merging bit
unwritten. Correct this issue.

Fixes #765
2023-08-30 12:10:46 +02:00
Xavier Morel
85a7890023 [CHG] runbot_merge: switch staging from github API to local
It has been a consideration for a while, but the pain of subtly
interacting with git via the ignominous CLI kept it back. Then ~~the
fire nation attacked~~ github got more and more tight-fisted (and in
some ways less reliable) with their API.

Staging pretty much just interacts with the git database, so it's both
a facultative github operator (it can just interact with git directly)
and a big consumer of API requests (because the git database endpoints
are very low level so it takes quite a bit of work to do anything
especially when high-level operations like rebase have to be
replicated by hand).

Furthermore, an issue has also been noticed which can be attributed to
using the github API (and that API's reliability getting worse): in
some cases github will fail to propagate a ref update / reset, so when
staging 2 PRs it's possible that the second one is merged on top of
the temporary branch of the first one, yielding a kinda broken commit
(in that it's a merge commit with a broken error message) instead of
the rebase / squash commit we expected.

As it turns out it's a very old issue but only happened very early so
was misattributed and not (sufficiently) guarded against:

- 41bd82244bb976bbd4d4be5e7bd792417c7dae6b (October 8th 2018) was
  spotted but thought to be a mergebot issue (might have been one of
  the opportunities where ref-checks were added though I can't find
  any reference to the commit in the runbot repo).
- 2be25052e147b151d1d8a5bc73cceb351586ce03 (October 15th, 2019) was
  missed (or ignored).
- 5a9fe7a7d05a9df7186072a7bffd60c6b428fd0e (July 31st, 2023) was
  spotted, but happened at a moment where everything kinda broke
  because of github rate-limiting ref updates, so the forensics were
  difficult and it was attributed to rate limiting issues.
- f10d03bf0f2e8f88f62a5d8356b84f714196130f (August 24th, 2023) broke
  the camel's back (and the head block): the logs were not too
  interspersed with other garbage and pretty clear that github ack'd a
  ref update, returned the correct oid when checking the ref, then
  returned the wrong oid when fetching it later on.

No Working Copy
===============

The working copy turns out to not be necessary, the plumbing commands
we *need* work just fine on a bare repository.

Working without a WC means we had to reimplement the high level
operations (rebase) by hand much as we'd done previously, *but* we
needed to do that anyway as git doesn't seem to provide any way to
retrieve the mapping when rebasing/cherrypicking, and cherrypicking by
commit doesn't work well as it can't really find the *merge base* it
needs.

Forward-porting can almost certainly be implemented similarly (with
some overhead), issue #803 has been opened to keep track of the idea.

No TMP
======

The `tmp.` branches are no more, the process of creating stagings is
based entirely around oids, if staging something fails we can just
abandon the oids (they'll be collected by the weekly GC), we only
need to update the staging branches at the very end of the process.

This simplifies things a fair bit.

For now we have stopped checking for visibility / backoff as we're
pushing via git, hopefully it is a more reliable reference than the
API.

Commmit Message Formatting
==========================

There's some unfortunate churn in the test, as the handling of
trailing newlines differs between github's APIs and git itself.

Fixes #247

PS: It might be a good idea to use pygit2 instead of the CLI
    eventually, the library is typed which is nice, and it avoids
    shelling out although that's really unlikely to be a major cost.
2023-08-25 15:06:04 +02:00
Xavier Morel
270dfdd495 [REF] *: move most feedback messages to pseudo-templates
Current system makes it hard to iterate feedback messages and make
them clearer, this should improve things a touch.

Use a bespoke model to avoid concerns with qweb rendering
complexity (we just want GFM output and should not need logic).

Also update fwbot test setup to always configure an fwbot name, in
order to avoid ping messages closing the PRs they're talking
about, that took a while to debug, and given the old message I assume
I'd already hit it and just been too lazy to fix. This requires
updating a bunch of tests as fwbot ping are sent *to*
`fp_github_name`, but sent *from* the reference user (because that's
the key we set).

Note: noupdate on CSV files doesn't seem to work anymore, which isn't
great. But instead set tracking on the template's templates, it's not
quite as good but should be sufficient.

Fixes #769
2023-06-14 16:01:45 +02:00
Xavier Morel
2009177ada [IMP] *: allow disabling staging on branch, remove fp target flag
- currently disabling staging only works globally, allow disabling on
  a single branch

  - use a toggle
  - remove a pair of tests which work specifically with `fp_target`,
    can't work with `active` (probably)
  - cleanup search of possible and active stagings, add relevant
    indexes and use direct search of relevant branches instead of
    looking up from the project

- also use toggle button for `active` on branches
- shitty workaround for upgrading DB: apparently mail really wants to
  have a `user_id` to do some weird thing, so need to re-add it after
  resetting everything

Fixes #727
2023-06-14 16:01:42 +02:00
Xavier Morel
a563fcf907 [REM] forwardport: fp_sequence field
It's almost certainly not useful, save as a minor convenience for
tests: decorrelating the branch sequence and the fp sequence seems
like it would only be extremely confusing, and on the mergebot all the
fp_sequence values are set to the default while the sequence values
are set to something useful and sensible (kinda).

Fixes #584
2022-12-08 10:46:22 +01:00
Xavier Morel
ebbe77b849 [IMP] runbot_merge: reorg test
Test seems to fail from time to time with one of the PRs getting
lost. Tried to move code around trying to investigate, can't repro
anymore. Possibly a race condition because the `to_pr` call was
performed too early, before the webhook had run (and thus before the
PR object had been created on the odoo side).

By moving the `to_pr` calls to after the cron run, we really ensure
the webhooks will have run.

Also update `to_pr` to ensure exactly one PR was retrieved, as
currently nothing is checked so we might have gotten none (yet), which
should be noticed early and clearly. In theory this also guards
against multiple PRs, but PRs should be unique on (repo, number).
2022-08-05 15:35:51 +02:00
Xavier Morel
66c2bdc25b [IMP] runbot_merge: error reporting on fast-forward failure
When a staging's fast-forward (to the target branch) fails, the
mergebot would provide no useful information on the staging or the
dashboard.

This is because the reason was set to the HTTP status, which in case
of a fast-forward error is just "422 client error: unprocessable
entity".

Improve this by trying to parse github's response in that case, and
using the JSON error message as failure reason. This provides more
useful failure information like "update is not a fast forward",
"reference does not exist", or a branch protection failure.

Closes #591
2022-06-30 15:07:49 +02:00
Xavier Morel
a7808425e3 [IMP] runbot_merge: reject review without email
If a reviewer doesn't have an email set, the Signed-Off-By is an
`@users.noreply.github.com` address which just looks weird in the
final result.

Initially the thinking was that emails would be required for users to
*be* reviewers or self-reviewers, but since those are now o2ms / m2ms
it's a bit of a pain in the ass.

Instead, provide an action to easily try and fetch the public email of
a user from github.

Fixes #531
2021-10-20 14:36:50 +02:00
Xavier Morel
6096cc61a9 [IMP] *: tag all rebased commits with source PRev
Although it's possible to find what PR a commit was part of with a bit
of `git log` magic (e.g. `--ancestry-path COMMIT.. --reverse`) it's
not the most convenient, and many people don't know about it, leading
them to various debatable decisions to try and mitigate the issue,
such as tagging every commit in a PR with the PR's identity, which
then leads github to spam the PR itself with pingbacks from its own
commits. Which is great.

Add this information to the commits when rebasing them (and *only*
when rebasing them), using a `Part-of:` pseudo-header.

Fixes #482
2021-08-24 15:39:47 +02:00
Xavier Morel
d249417ceb [FIX] forwardport: fix deduplication of authorship in multi-pr conflict
a45f7260fa had intended to use the
original authorship information for conflict commit even if there were
multiple commits, as long as there was only one author (/ committer)
for the entire sequence.

Sadly the deduplication was buggy as it took the *authorship date* in
account, which basically ensured commits would never be considered as
having the same authorship outside of tests (where it was possible for
commits to be created at the same second).

Related to #505
2021-08-24 15:39:47 +02:00
Xavier Morel
6a8c13b1ef [IMP] runbot_merge: show linked PRs during staging and after merging
Previously, a PR's status page would only show the linked / related
PRs when `open`.

Since the relations between PRs remains useful, also make this
information available during staging and after merging.

Fixes #463
2021-08-24 15:39:47 +02:00
Xavier Morel
5c19342bf6 [CHG] runbot_merge, forwardport: remove labelling
Because github materialises every labels change in the
timeline (interspersed with comments), the increasing labels churn
contributes to PRs being difficult to read and review.

This change removes the update of labels on PRs, instead the mergebot
will automatically send a comment to created PRs serving as a
notification that the PR was noticed & providing a link to the
mergebot's dashboard for that PR where users should be able to see the
PR state in detail in case they wonder what's what.

Lots of tests had to be edited to:

- remove any check on the labels of the PR
- add checks on the PR dashboard (to ensure that they're at least on
  the correct "view")
- add a helper to handle the comment now added to every PR by the 'bot
- since that helper is needed by both mergebot and forwardbot, the
  utils modules were unified and moved out of the odoo modules

Probably relevant note: no test was added for the dashboard
ACL, though since I had to explicitly unset the group on the repo used
for tests for things to work it looks to me like it at least excludes
people just fine.

Fixes #419
2020-11-20 07:41:54 +01:00