update common file

[bianpengyuan]

Meanwhile test the new proxy builder image with prow.

[venilnoronha]

Does this need to first go in the istio/common-files repo?

[bianpengyuan]

@venilnoronha Yeah, I run make update-common to generate this change.

[bianpengyuan]

Hmm... that's strange, why tide is not here..

[bianpengyuan]

/retest

[bianpengyuan]

@clarketm Any idea?

[clarketm]

@bianpengyuan

@clarketm Any idea?

I see an issue in tide logs. I think this job is to blame: https://github.com/istio/test-infra/blob/c33be824a61027045427c0d5f61c681a5c6263ec/prow/cluster/jobs/istio/proxy/istio.proxy.master.yaml#L42. If we omit the context here it should default to job name and not conflict.

 jsonPayload: {
  base-sha: "90b1d9f97e105d20698ece0ebd6fe2f75b44c7ea"   
  branch: "master"   
  component: "tide"   
  controller: "sync"   
  error: "error setting up context checker for pr 2553: contexts prow/proxy-presubmit.sh are defined as required and optional"   
  file: "prow/tide/tide.go:449"   
  func: "k8s.io/test-infra/prow/tide.(*Controller).filterSubpools.func1"   
  level: "error"   
  msg: "Error initializing subpool."   
  org: "istio"   
  repo: "proxy"   
 }

[bianpengyuan]

I see. Should this be fixed or context should be the only key for job? But anyway let me remove the job. New builder test is already done.

[howardjohn]

@bianpengyuan we should probably remove the context field from proxy entirely, as we have done with other repos. Basically context is what shows up on the github list. It is confusing since in some places it shows up as the context (like prow/proxy-presubmit.sh) and other places the name (like prow/proxy-presubmit I think). If you remove context everything uses name

[clarketm]

@bianpengyuan
The core problem was that there were different jobs with the same context field. As @howardjohn stated a good way around this is to simply omit the context field and let Prow default it to the job name (or set context to unique value).

[howardjohn]

the job names are also not unique for proxy. We should probably just make it over to use the config generation, I don't think there are any blockers anymore?

…

On Tue, Nov 12, 2019, 5:36 PM Travis Clarke ***@***.***> wrote: @bianpengyuan <https://github.com/bianpengyuan> The core problem was there were *different* jobs with the *same* context field. As @howardjohn <https://github.com/howardjohn> stated a good way around this is to simply *omit* the context field and let Prow *default* it to the job name (of course job names should be unique as well). — You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2551?email_source=notifications&email_token=AAEYGXMXC6WSF3IEVI4ZBMLQTNKY3A5CNFSM4JMHF222YY3PNVWWK3TUL52HS4DFVREXG43VMVBW63LNMVXHJKTDN5WW2ZLOORPWSZGOED4R2XI#issuecomment-553196893>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAEYGXO74ZPGFIDN4FPJQVDQTNKY3ANCNFSM4JMHF22Q> .

[clarketm]

the job names are also not unique for proxy. We should probably just make it over to use the config generation, I don't think there are any blockers anymore?

Personally, I do not know the history for why these istio/proxy jobs were not generated. The less attractive alternative is to update the job names.