lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in commit message linter#19654
Merged
maflcko merged 1 commit intobitcoin:masterfrom Aug 5, 2020
Merged
lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in commit message linter#19654maflcko merged 1 commit intobitcoin:masterfrom
maflcko merged 1 commit intobitcoin:masterfrom
Conversation
fjahr
changed the title
Member
|
Related: travis-ci/travis-ci#4596 |
Member
|
Concept ACK on not relying on |
ryanofsky
added a commit
to ryanofsky/home
that referenced
this pull request
Aug 13, 2020
This was referenced Oct 3, 2020
maflcko
pushed a commit
to maflcko/bitcoin-core
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 4, 2020
a91ab86 lint: Use TRAVIS_BRANCH in lint-git-commit-check.sh (Fabian Jahr) c11dc99 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE in whitespace linter (Fabian Jahr) 1b41ce8 lint: Don't use TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE for commit-script-check (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: This is causing problems again, very similar to bitcoin#19654. UPDATE: This now removes all remaining usages of TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE and instead uses TRAVIS_BRANCH for the range, including `lint-git-commit-check` where TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE had already been removed. For builds triggered by a pull request, TRAVIS_BRANCH is the name of the branch targeted by the pull request. In the linters there is still a fallback that assumes master as the target branch. ACKs for top commit: sipa: ACK a91ab86. See test I tried in bitcoin#20075. Tree-SHA512: 1378bdebd5d8787a83fbda5d9999cc9447209423e7f0218fe5eb240e6a32dc1b51d1cd53b4f8cd1f71574d935ac5e22e203dfe09cce17e9976a48416038e1263
PastaPastaPasta
pushed a commit
to PastaPastaPasta/dash
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 1, 2021
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
PastaPastaPasta
pushed a commit
to PastaPastaPasta/dash
that referenced
this pull request
Jul 16, 2021
…ssage linter 7235178 lint: Remove travis env var from commit linter (Fabian Jahr) Pull request description: bitcoin#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out `TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGE` which is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR. I think we rather want to use something like `git merge-base` to get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so the `merge-base` range should be used there by default. ACKs for top commit: hebasto: ACK 7235178, I have reviewed the code and it looks OK, I agree it can be merged. Tree-SHA512: afb27bb386855cb8d5cf84fd3a6c11ef1160b25af6175ed0aa146bf04b9a26eb77298df70df0a855f8c46f19f08b3f62c49872c12974fcfa5526a15ee05b3c10
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
4 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
#19439 was recently merged and seemed to work fine but I now noticed strange behavior when it was running in Travis, which I could not reproduce locally. It turns out
TRAVIS_COMMIT_RANGEwhich is used in Travis to get the commits for the linter, uses all the commits that were in a push, which includes all rebase commits for example. This means that the linter can fail on a commit that the developer has never even seen before, which can be very confusing. See an example here which caused me to look into this: https://travis-ci.org/github/bitcoin/bitcoin/jobs/714296381 The commit that is reported as failing in my PR is not part of my PR.I think we rather want to use something like
git merge-baseto get the commit range by default and in Travis. I am leaving the env variable functionality in place with a different name but this is not a variable that can be expected to be present in the CI environments so themerge-baserange should be used there by default.