-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 349
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
infra: Better name for kickstart test run log bundles #5648
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
infra: Better name for kickstart test run log bundles #5648
Conversation
cb9095f
to
edc35f2
Compare
/kickstart-test --testtype smoke |
Did you test this on your fork? |
I know something special is needed to test the workflow changes but so far I have not found it documented anywhere. :P Any pointers how to do that ? @jkonecny12 @KKoukiou |
It of course does not get run when I just run it on this PR - that would be too simple and convenient I guess. ;-) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Needs a bit more polishing.
Unfortunately you are correct. For this to work you need a self hosted runner on your fork which is not trivial to setup. I'll take a look on this. |
edc35f2
to
085e16c
Compare
Thanks! I have a few other ideas for the kickstart workflows, but I really need to be able to test them during development & ideally how to set workflow testing up should be part of the workflow development documentation so more people can contribute as well. :) |
039e0f5
to
cc771cb
Compare
/kickstart-test --testtype smoke |
Instead of just "logs.zip", lets name the log bundles based on the PR number, timestamp and branch SHA. This way it should be much easier to make sense of downloaded log bundles from various PRs.
cc771cb
to
efe5825
Compare
efe5825
to
29b3301
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It does not like it:
Run actions/upload-artifact@v4
Multiple search paths detected. Calculating the least common ancestor of all paths
The least common ancestor is /home/github/actions-runner/_work/anaconda/anaconda. This will be the root directory of the artifact
With the provided path, there will be 35 files uploaded
Error: The artifact name is not valid: kstest_logs_pr5648-2024-05-15_15:06:25-29b330179fae063b76829247d38f9f4b843c09a8. Contains the following character: Colon :
Invalid characters include: Double quote ", Colon :, Less than <, Greater than >, Vertical bar |, Asterisk *, Question mark ?, Carriage return \r, Line feed \n, Backslash , Forward slash /
pr_num="${{ github.event.issue.number }}" | ||
timestamp=${{ steps.teimstamp.outputs.timestamp }} | ||
sha="${{ steps.pr_api.outcome == 'success' && fromJson(steps.pr_api.outputs.data).head.sha }}" | ||
echo "image_description=pr$pr_num-$timestamp-$sha" >> $GITHUB_OUTPUT |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I realize this can be nicely made reusable role among this workflow and the build-image workflow.
Instead of just "logs.zip", lets name the log bundles based on the PR number, timestamp and branch SHA.
This way it should be much easier to make sense of downloaded log bundles from various PRs.