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

[JENKINS-73835] Delete LockStepTest.deleteRunningBuildNewBuildClearsLock now that running builds may not be deleted #716

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Oct 15, 2024

Conversation

dwnusbaum
Copy link
Member

@dwnusbaum dwnusbaum commented Oct 15, 2024

See JENKINS-73835, jenkinsci/jenkins#9810 (and specifically jenkinsci/jenkins#9810 (comment)). It is no longer possible to delete builds that are still running, so LockStepTest.deleteRunningBuildNewBuildClearsLock fails against Jenkins 2.481+.

I considered making the test perform a hard kill via WorkflowRun.doKill before deleting the build, but hard kills are already covered by various tests in https://github.com/jenkinsci/lockable-resources-plugin/blob/f310d75b5595c93593b0b81767e549389c8fea06/src/test/java/org/jenkins/plugins/lockableresources/LockStepHardKillTest.java, so I am proposing to just delete the test instead.

Testing done

I tried a few test changes against 2.481 before deciding to delete the test.

Proposed upgrade guidelines

N/A

Submitter checklist

  • The Jira / Github issue, if it exists, is well-described.
  • The changelog entries and upgrade guidelines are appropriate for the audience affected by the change (users or developers, depending on the change) and are in the imperative mood (see examples).
    • The changelog generator for plugins uses the pull request title as the changelog entry.
    • Fill in the Proposed upgrade guidelines section only if there are breaking changes or changes that may require extra steps from users during the upgrade.
  • There is automated testing or an explanation that explains why this change has no tests.
  • New public functions for internal use only are annotated with @NoExternalUse. In case it is used by non java code the Used by {@code <panel>.jelly} Javadocs are annotated.
  • New or substantially changed JavaScript is not defined inline and does not call eval to ease the future introduction of Content Security Policy (CSP) directives (see documentation).
  • For dependency updates, there are links to external changelogs and, if possible, full differentials.
  • For new APIs and extension points, there is a link to at least one consumer.
  • Any localizations are transferred to *.properties files.
  • Changes in the interface are documented also as examples.

Maintainer checklist

Before the changes are marked as ready-for-merge:

  • There is at least one (1) approval for the pull request and no outstanding requests for change.
  • Conversations in the pull request are over, or it is explicit that a reviewer is not blocking the change.
  • Changelog entries in the pull request title and/or Proposed changelog entries are accurate, human-readable, and in the imperative mood.
  • Proper changelog labels are set so that the changelog can be generated automatically. See also release-drafter-labels.
  • If the change needs additional upgrade steps from users, the upgrade-guide-needed label is set and there is a Proposed upgrade guidelines section in the pull request title (see example).
  • java code changes are tested by automated test.

Copy link
Member

@jglick jglick left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

#35 FTR. Arguably more interesting would be a JenkinsSessionRule test that deletes the build on disk and then asserts that the system recovers after a restart.

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite added the bug label Oct 15, 2024
@MarkEWaite
Copy link
Contributor

I've labeled it as bug so that a release will be generated when it merges.

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite enabled auto-merge (squash) October 15, 2024 17:31
@jglick
Copy link
Member

jglick commented Oct 15, 2024

I've labeled it as bug so that a release will be generated when it merges.

@MarkEWaite use developer for this purpose.

@MarkEWaite
Copy link
Contributor

@MarkEWaite use developer for this purpose.

I've added the developer label to the list of labels in the repository and have labeled this pull request with developer.

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite merged commit 1f0dff5 into jenkinsci:master Oct 15, 2024
17 checks passed
@dwnusbaum dwnusbaum deleted the JENKINS-73835-tests branch October 15, 2024 17:53
@jglick
Copy link
Member

jglick commented Oct 15, 2024

I've […] labeled this pull request with developer.

You have?

@mPokornyETM
Copy link
Contributor

thanks to all for contribution

@MarkEWaite MarkEWaite added developer Changes that affect plugin and core developers and removed bug labels Oct 15, 2024
@MarkEWaite
Copy link
Contributor

You have?

Apparently missed that final click to change the label. Will fix the changelog now...

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
developer Changes that affect plugin and core developers
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants