From thomas.stuefe at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 06:17:08 2020 From: thomas.stuefe at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_St=C3=BCfe?=) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 07:17:08 +0100 Subject: Reintroducing XL .. XS, T, etc? Message-ID: Hi, before Skara, we had this informal way of indicating patch size and estimated reviewer muscle needed with XL, XS. In addition, we started to use T for trivial. Would it be possible to reintroduce this in some form, maybe via something like /size XXS ? Thanks, Thomas From thomas.stuefe at gmail.com Sun Nov 1 07:10:24 2020 From: thomas.stuefe at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_St=C3=BCfe?=) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 08:10:24 +0100 Subject: commits not associated with github user? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Okay, I tried this and as expected the mail address remains unverified in Github since it is not a real mail address (or is it? At least I have no idea how to access this mail box, if it exists). Did this still work for you with the mail address left unverified? Thanks, Thomas On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 10:49 AM Thomas St?fe wrote: > Hi Anirvan, > > interesting idea, thank you! > > But the openjdk mail addresses are not valid. I hesitate to add an invalid > mail address to my Github profile. I'd rather that the correct mail > addresses be used by the Skara tools, those we are registered in the census > with and which are used by the Github account. Especially since these fake > addresses also add confusion to mailing list traffic. > > Thanks, Thomas > > > On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 9:16 AM Anirvan Sarkar > wrote: > >> Hi Thomas, >> >> I had also observed the same behaviour. >> Then I noticed that OpenJDK commits are committed with OpenJDK email >> address [1]. >> So I added my OpenJDK email address to GitHub email settings [2] and >> after some days when I checked again, I found my commit was linked to my >> GitHub user [3]. >> >> Can you add your OpenJDK email address in your GitHub settings and see if >> it works for you? >> If it works then we can ask the Skara team to add this step in the Wiki. >> >> [1] >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a.patch >> [2] https://github.com/settings/emails >> [3] >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a >> >> On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 19:40, Thomas St?fe >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> a small question: I associated my OpenJDK user with my GitHub user as >>> explained in [1]. But I still do not see my github user associated with >>> commits in the OpenJDK, e.g. for >>> >>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7ba6a6bf003b810e9f48cb755abe39b1376ad3fe#diff-40f3361acaecc2d05896655fa532ab5b6cba2885cbcc5796cac4e81d010763ba >>> >>> It says my name, fully written, not clickable. Seems to be the case for >>> many developers, but not all of them. For some, the commit is actually >>> linked to the Github user. >>> >>> Did I miss some step somewhere when setting up my user? >>> >>> Thanks! >>> Thomas >>> >>> [1] >>> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Skara#Skara-GettingStarted >>> >> >> >> -- >> Anirvan >> > From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Sun Nov 1 09:54:13 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Sun, 1 Nov 2020 09:54:13 GMT Subject: RFR: Miscellaneous minor code improvements Message-ID: Hi! Analyzing the skara codebase in Intellij IDEA reveals that there several opportunities for minor improvements in the codebase. One such improvement is to use the `<>` instead of explicit types. Hence, I propose this patch. There are other inspections and improvements possible as well. In case such changes are welcome, I would be happy to contribute patches for those as well. Also, in that case should those changes be a part of this PR or should there be a separate PR for each ? Thanks. Regards, Kartik ------------- Commit messages: - Replace explicit type with <> Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/935/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=935&range=00 Stats: 81 lines in 37 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 81 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/935.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/935/head:pull/935 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/935 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 09:07:56 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 09:07:56 GMT Subject: RFR: Miscellaneous minor code improvements In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 09:50:25 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > Analyzing the skara codebase in Intellij IDEA reveals that there several opportunities for minor improvements in the codebase. One such improvement is to use the `<>` instead of explicit types. Hence, I propose this patch. > > There are other inspections and improvements possible as well. In case such changes are welcome, I would be happy to contribute patches for those as well. Also, in that case should those changes be a part of this PR or should there be a separate PR for each ? > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/935 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 11:15:23 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:15:23 GMT Subject: RFR: forge: Retry failed fetches a few times Message-ID: <933BRDMYIjXr_Qsi4YT0NYdQVTf0V6WKOrqW9ymxHf4=.adcd66e6-7185-48d2-8a44-c5bac8656566@github.com> When updating a seed repository that is not allowed to be stale, retry the fetch a few times to work around intermittent problems. ------------- Commit messages: - Retry failed fetches a few times Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/936/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=936&range=00 Stats: 16 lines in 1 file changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/936.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/936/head:pull/936 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/936 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 11:36:57 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:36:57 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5QVmpCxu9Wi7tCU8YUnc60IZwvRNJE0kWeWBF_0Y78A=.6d51bb52-e071-4d81-ad80-ff55acafbfb3@github.com> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 12:47:40 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. >> >> (This is to support makefiles) > > jcheck/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/jcheck/WhitespaceCheck.java line 58: > >> 56: var crIndex = line.indexOf('\r'); >> 57: var ignoreTab = tabPattern.matcher(path.toString()).matches(); >> 58: if ((tabIndex >= 0 && !ignoreTab) || crIndex >= 0 || line.endsWith(" ")) { > > This won't catch if a tabFile has a trailing tab. I'm not sure I understand. Do you want jcheck to complain about trailing tabs, even if the file type is on tabfiles/ignore-tabs? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 12:29:27 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:29:27 GMT Subject: RFR: forge: Retry failed fetches a few times In-Reply-To: <933BRDMYIjXr_Qsi4YT0NYdQVTf0V6WKOrqW9ymxHf4=.adcd66e6-7185-48d2-8a44-c5bac8656566@github.com> References: <933BRDMYIjXr_Qsi4YT0NYdQVTf0V6WKOrqW9ymxHf4=.adcd66e6-7185-48d2-8a44-c5bac8656566@github.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:12:21 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > When updating a seed repository that is not allowed to be stale, retry the fetch a few times to work around intermittent problems. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/936 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 12:29:55 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 12:29:55 GMT Subject: Integrated: Replace explicit type with <> In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <9UU64p6GIUavglDU-v6OXndsCRdn15p0kfqnzXmze8o=.809d716f-17c0-4b71-8449-a396f494b2b5@github.com> On Sun, 1 Nov 2020 09:50:25 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > Analyzing the skara codebase in Intellij IDEA reveals that there several opportunities for minor improvements in the codebase. One such improvement is to use the `<>` instead of explicit types. Hence, I propose this patch. > > There are other inspections and improvements possible as well. In case such changes are welcome, I would be happy to contribute patches for those as well. Also, in that case should those changes be a part of this PR or should there be a separate PR for each ? > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 7eaebc72 Author: Kartik Ohri Committer: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/7eaebc72 Stats: 81 lines in 37 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 81 mod Replace explicit type with <> Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/935 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 13:29:10 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:29:10 GMT Subject: Integrated: forge: Retry failed fetches a few times In-Reply-To: <933BRDMYIjXr_Qsi4YT0NYdQVTf0V6WKOrqW9ymxHf4=.adcd66e6-7185-48d2-8a44-c5bac8656566@github.com> References: <933BRDMYIjXr_Qsi4YT0NYdQVTf0V6WKOrqW9ymxHf4=.adcd66e6-7185-48d2-8a44-c5bac8656566@github.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 11:12:21 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > When updating a seed repository that is not allowed to be stale, retry the fetch a few times to work around intermittent problems. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: d2401270 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/d2401270 Stats: 16 lines in 1 file changed: 14 ins; 0 del; 2 mod forge: Retry failed fetches a few times Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/936 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 13:32:57 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:32:57 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis Message-ID: Later versions of GitLab allows Merge Request approvals even in the CE version, so we can start to use that instead of the award-emoji workaround used previously. ------------- Commit messages: - Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=937&range=00 Stats: 242 lines in 11 files changed: 2 ins; 221 del; 19 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/937/head:pull/937 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 13:32:57 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:32:57 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:27:32 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Later versions of GitLab allows Merge Request approvals even in the CE version, so we can start to use that instead of the award-emoji workaround used previously. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 13:55:23 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:55:23 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:30:11 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: >> Later versions of GitLab allows Merge Request approvals even in the CE version, so we can start to use that instead of the award-emoji workaround used previously. > > Looks good! So this will remove the ability to review using emojis? This sounds like there need to be a "flag day" for switching review methods. (I'm not saying this is bad, just verifying that I understand the implications correctly.) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com Mon Nov 2 13:57:59 2020 From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:57:59 +0100 Subject: commits not associated with github user? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <66acdba3-8b67-b021-e312-7f3997ed396a@oracle.com> It's a bit weird (since the openjdk.org domain has still not gotten live for MX), but this is indeed the correct way to get your github account associated with your commits. You'll just have to live with the address being "unverified" in github for the moment, and be thankful that github still trusts it enough to use it for linking commits with accounts. :) I assure you we do not want this limbo to continue any longer than necessary. /Magnus On 2020-11-01 08:10, Thomas St?fe wrote: > Okay, I tried this and as expected the mail address remains unverified in > Github since it is not a real mail address (or is it? At least I have no > idea how to access this mail box, if it exists). Did this still work for > you with the mail address left unverified? > > Thanks, Thomas > > On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 10:49 AM Thomas St?fe > wrote: > >> Hi Anirvan, >> >> interesting idea, thank you! >> >> But the openjdk mail addresses are not valid. I hesitate to add an invalid >> mail address to my Github profile. I'd rather that the correct mail >> addresses be used by the Skara tools, those we are registered in the census >> with and which are used by the Github account. Especially since these fake >> addresses also add confusion to mailing list traffic. >> >> Thanks, Thomas >> >> >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 9:16 AM Anirvan Sarkar >> wrote: >> >>> Hi Thomas, >>> >>> I had also observed the same behaviour. >>> Then I noticed that OpenJDK commits are committed with OpenJDK email >>> address [1]. >>> So I added my OpenJDK email address to GitHub email settings [2] and >>> after some days when I checked again, I found my commit was linked to my >>> GitHub user [3]. >>> >>> Can you add your OpenJDK email address in your GitHub settings and see if >>> it works for you? >>> If it works then we can ask the Skara team to add this step in the Wiki. >>> >>> [1] >>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a.patch >>> [2] https://github.com/settings/emails >>> [3] >>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a >>> >>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 19:40, Thomas St?fe >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> a small question: I associated my OpenJDK user with my GitHub user as >>>> explained in [1]. But I still do not see my github user associated with >>>> commits in the OpenJDK, e.g. for >>>> >>>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7ba6a6bf003b810e9f48cb755abe39b1376ad3fe#diff-40f3361acaecc2d05896655fa532ab5b6cba2885cbcc5796cac4e81d010763ba >>>> >>>> It says my name, fully written, not clickable. Seems to be the case for >>>> many developers, but not all of them. For some, the commit is actually >>>> linked to the Github user. >>>> >>>> Did I miss some step somewhere when setting up my user? >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Thomas >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Skara#Skara-GettingStarted >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Anirvan >>> From kcr at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 14:17:59 2020 From: kcr at openjdk.java.net (Kevin Rushforth) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:17:59 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 13:53:18 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Looks good! > > So this will remove the ability to review using emojis? This sounds like there need to be a "flag day" for switching review methods. (I'm not saying this is bad, just verifying that I understand the implications correctly.) Will this be a hard switch, or will you continue to also honor the "thumbs-up" emoji? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 14:41:43 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:41:43 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:15:48 GMT, Kevin Rushforth wrote: >> So this will remove the ability to review using emojis? This sounds like there need to be a "flag day" for switching review methods. (I'm not saying this is bad, just verifying that I understand the implications correctly.) > > Will this be a hard switch, or will you continue to also honor the "thumbs-up" emoji? This will be a hard switch, the thumbs-up button has an unfortunate drawback, which is that GitLab does not update the merge request's "updated_at" field when it is used. This in turn means that we have had to disable several optimizations to reduce network traffic -> we have to use a much lower polling rate for GitLab -> command replies can take up to a minute instead of a few seconds. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From thomas.stuefe at gmail.com Mon Nov 2 14:52:16 2020 From: thomas.stuefe at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Thomas_St=C3=BCfe?=) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 15:52:16 +0100 Subject: commits not associated with github user? In-Reply-To: <66acdba3-8b67-b021-e312-7f3997ed396a@oracle.com> References: <66acdba3-8b67-b021-e312-7f3997ed396a@oracle.com> Message-ID: Thank you for the clarification, Magnus. I added my fake openjdk mail address to my Github account yesterday, without any effects yet, but it may just take some time. I'll be patient :) Cheers, Thomas On Mon, Nov 2, 2020 at 2:58 PM Magnus Ihse Bursie < magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com> wrote: > It's a bit weird (since the openjdk.org domain has still not gotten live > for MX), but this is indeed the correct way to get your github account > associated with your commits. You'll just have to live with the address > being "unverified" in github for the moment, and be thankful that github > still trusts it enough to use it for linking commits with accounts. :) > > I assure you we do not want this limbo to continue any longer than > necessary. > > /Magnus > > > On 2020-11-01 08:10, Thomas St?fe wrote: > > Okay, I tried this and as expected the mail address remains unverified in > > Github since it is not a real mail address (or is it? At least I have no > > idea how to access this mail box, if it exists). Did this still work for > > you with the mail address left unverified? > > > > Thanks, Thomas > > > > On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 10:49 AM Thomas St?fe > > wrote: > > > >> Hi Anirvan, > >> > >> interesting idea, thank you! > >> > >> But the openjdk mail addresses are not valid. I hesitate to add an > invalid > >> mail address to my Github profile. I'd rather that the correct mail > >> addresses be used by the Skara tools, those we are registered in the > census > >> with and which are used by the Github account. Especially since these > fake > >> addresses also add confusion to mailing list traffic. > >> > >> Thanks, Thomas > >> > >> > >> On Sat, Oct 31, 2020 at 9:16 AM Anirvan Sarkar < > powers.anirvan at gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Hi Thomas, > >>> > >>> I had also observed the same behaviour. > >>> Then I noticed that OpenJDK commits are committed with OpenJDK email > >>> address [1]. > >>> So I added my OpenJDK email address to GitHub email settings [2] and > >>> after some days when I checked again, I found my commit was linked to > my > >>> GitHub user [3]. > >>> > >>> Can you add your OpenJDK email address in your GitHub settings and see > if > >>> it works for you? > >>> If it works then we can ask the Skara team to add this step in the > Wiki. > >>> > >>> [1] > >>> > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a.patch > >>> [2] https://github.com/settings/emails > >>> [3] > >>> > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7a937e0ddedbb06e18196b6c3f4170e98fc2936a > >>> > >>> On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 19:40, Thomas St?fe > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi, > >>>> > >>>> a small question: I associated my OpenJDK user with my GitHub user as > >>>> explained in [1]. But I still do not see my github user associated > with > >>>> commits in the OpenJDK, e.g. for > >>>> > >>>> > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/commit/7ba6a6bf003b810e9f48cb755abe39b1376ad3fe#diff-40f3361acaecc2d05896655fa532ab5b6cba2885cbcc5796cac4e81d010763ba > >>>> > >>>> It says my name, fully written, not clickable. Seems to be the case > for > >>>> many developers, but not all of them. For some, the commit is actually > >>>> linked to the Github user. > >>>> > >>>> Did I miss some step somewhere when setting up my user? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks! > >>>> Thomas > >>>> > >>>> [1] > >>>> > https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Skara#Skara-GettingStarted > >>>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Anirvan > >>> > > From ihse at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 16:10:13 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 16:10:13 GMT Subject: RFR: Switch to using GitLab approvals instead of award_emojis In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 14:39:32 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Will this be a hard switch, or will you continue to also honor the "thumbs-up" emoji? > > This will be a hard switch, the thumbs-up button has an unfortunate drawback, which is that GitLab does not update the merge request's "updated_at" field when it is used. This in turn means that we have had to disable several optimizations to reduce network traffic -> we have to use a much lower polling rate for GitLab -> command replies can take up to a minute instead of a few seconds. @rwestberg Sounds like an acceptable rationale for disabling the old behavior. Just make sure to communicate clearly at which point review method changes. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/937 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 2 17:27:42 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:27:42 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit Message-ID: Hi! The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. Thanks. Regards, Kartik ------------- Commit messages: - git-pr reviewer rename add option to credit Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=938&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-725 Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/938/head:pull/938 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 From david.holmes at oracle.com Tue Nov 3 00:50:21 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:50:21 +1000 Subject: RFR: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <984ad49f-c079-7552-2ed3-49c13f78731c@oracle.com> Hi, On 3/11/2020 3:27 am, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. > > I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. Documentation is here: https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Pull+Request+Commands#PullRequestCommands-/reviewer Cheers, David > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik > > ------------- > > Commit messages: > - git-pr reviewer rename add option to credit > > Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938/files > Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=938&range=00 > Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-725 > Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 5 mod > Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938.diff > Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/938/head:pull/938 > > PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 > From nick.gasson at arm.com Tue Nov 3 02:09:17 2020 From: nick.gasson at arm.com (Nick Gasson) Date: Tue, 03 Nov 2020 10:09:17 +0800 Subject: The command integrate can only be used in open pull requests. Message-ID: <85lffji436.fsf@nicgas01-pc.shanghai.arm.com> Hi, https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/760 After I used /integrate on the above pull request, the openjdk bot repeatedly posted "The command integrate can only be used in open pull requests" every few minutes (10 times as of writing). It _seems_ to have stopped after I deleted the branch in my local fork but that may have been a coincidence. -- Thanks, Nick From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 08:11:18 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 08:11:18 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:24:38 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. > > I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. > > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Thanks David for the reply. I think the link you mentioned is rather for the PR bot not the cli tool. But in any case, I do not have a OpenJDK login so I think cannot modify that page. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 09:25:59 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 09:25:59 GMT Subject: RFR: Deprecate GitLab award emojis for flagging a PR as reviewed Message-ID: Before disabling support for GitLab award emojis as review markers, we can start with posting a notification about the preferred way. ------------- Commit messages: - Deprecate award emojis as reviews Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=939&range=00 Stats: 38 lines in 3 files changed: 33 ins; 0 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/939/head:pull/939 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 10:48:51 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 10:48:51 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 10:56:25 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: >> The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. >> >> (This is to support makefiles) > > How about naming the configuration `ignore-tabs` instead? To make it a bit more clear what it does :) @edvbld > How about naming the configuration `ignore-tabs` instead? To make it a bit more clear what it does :) Sure. I checked for "prior art" on multiword keywords, but did not find any such instances. :) This will mean that the corresponding Java variable needs a different name, since "-" is not valid in Java identifiers. (And if we're going this way, personally I think `allow-tabs` would be even better) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 11:06:51 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:06:51 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. > > (This is to support makefiles) Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Disallow trailing tabs even for tabfiles ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files/b4ffcde1..d8c4f75d Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=00-01 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 1 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/929/head:pull/929 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 11:09:28 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:09:28 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. > > (This is to support makefiles) Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Rename "tabfiles" to "ignore-tabs" ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files/d8c4f75d..4aaa659f Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=01-02 Stats: 8 lines in 2 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 8 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/929/head:pull/929 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 3 13:35:58 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:35:58 GMT Subject: RFR: Deprecate GitLab award emojis for flagging a PR as reviewed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 09:23:04 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Before disabling support for GitLab award emojis as review markers, we can start with posting a notification about the preferred way. Looks good! bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 678: > 676: var body = added.getValue() + "\n" + > 677: " ?? Marking a PR as reviewed using the emoji buttons is deprecated and will not be supported in the near future. " + > 678: "Please use the `Approve` button instead!\n\n" + Not sure whether we need the exclamation mark or not, I leave that up to you ?? ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939 From kartikohri13 at gmail.com Tue Nov 3 15:12:50 2020 From: kartikohri13 at gmail.com (Kartik Ohri) Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2020 20:42:50 +0530 Subject: Raising JDK to 15 Message-ID: Hi! It has been some time since Java 15 was released. It might make sense to raise the JDK level required for building project Skara to Java 15. This will help the project to utilise text blocks. If there is no objection to this, I would be happy to create and submit a patch using Text Blocks in the project where it is useful. Thanks. Regards, Kartik From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 05:30:36 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 05:30:36 GMT Subject: RFR: Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class Message-ID: The target ref resolution is better done locally to avoid races and also unnecessary API calls when only the ref name is used. ------------- Commit messages: - Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=940&range=00 Stats: 92 lines in 15 files changed: 7 ins; 47 del; 38 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/940/head:pull/940 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 08:15:19 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 08:15:19 GMT Subject: RFR: Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > The target ref resolution is better done locally to avoid races and also unnecessary API calls when only the ref name is used. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Restore fetch on missing ref ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940/files/56bcf097..d3dbae26 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=940&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=940&range=00-01 Stats: 8 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/940/head:pull/940 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 08:23:15 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 08:23:15 GMT Subject: Integrated: Deprecate GitLab award emojis for flagging a PR as reviewed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 09:23:04 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Before disabling support for GitLab award emojis as review markers, we can start with posting a notification about the preferred way. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: ffe58b61 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/ffe58b61 Stats: 38 lines in 3 files changed: 33 ins; 0 del; 5 mod Deprecate GitLab award emojis for flagging a PR as reviewed Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 08:23:15 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 08:23:15 GMT Subject: RFR: Deprecate GitLab award emojis for flagging a PR as reviewed In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 13:33:49 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: >> Before disabling support for GitLab award emojis as review markers, we can start with posting a notification about the preferred way. > > bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 678: > >> 676: var body = added.getValue() + "\n" + >> 677: " ?? Marking a PR as reviewed using the emoji buttons is deprecated and will not be supported in the near future. " + >> 678: "Please use the `Approve` button instead!\n\n" + > > Not sure whether we need the exclamation mark or not, I leave that up to you ?? No idea, but can't hurt I guess.. :) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/939 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 12:19:01 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:19:01 GMT Subject: RFR: GitLab approval support missing asString Message-ID: This minor fix makes the approval button support for GitLab work properly. ------------- Commit messages: - Fix missing asString Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/941/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=941&range=00 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/941.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/941/head:pull/941 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/941 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 13:12:14 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:12:14 GMT Subject: RFR: Ensure that a check that no longer requires a refresh is removed from the list Message-ID: When a check transitions from needing a periodic refresh to stable, it should be removed from the list of PRs that needs a refresh. ------------- Commit messages: - Ensure that a check that no longer requires a refresh is removed from the list Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/942/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=942&range=00 Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/942.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/942/head:pull/942 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/942 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:34:58 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:34:58 GMT Subject: RFR: Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 08:15:19 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> The target ref resolution is better done locally to avoid races and also unnecessary API calls when only the ref name is used. > > Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Restore fetch on missing ref Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:35:13 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:35:13 GMT Subject: RFR: GitLab approval support missing asString In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <5CqPEpolE7KwWsdW2vTKjeipAK69jH9rOsRftpB62r4=.93fe3c7e-1841-4c34-bb70-61657f5a3fb9@github.com> On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:16:05 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > This minor fix makes the approval button support for GitLab work properly. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/941 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:35:29 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:35:29 GMT Subject: RFR: Ensure that a check that no longer requires a refresh is removed from the list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <-2nWgUmx4YnmHHVdhxVP0L9eWRXZhmXqfxXxZOfZ-qw=.beb4fd3f-0e69-4acd-adc5-cc95318a37ea@github.com> On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:09:14 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > When a check transitions from needing a periodic refresh to stable, it should be removed from the list of PRs that needs a refresh. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/942 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:53:39 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:53:39 GMT Subject: Integrated: Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 05:27:36 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > The target ref resolution is better done locally to avoid races and also unnecessary API calls when only the ref name is used. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: c23ff3bb Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/c23ff3bb Stats: 93 lines in 15 files changed: 10 ins; 44 del; 39 mod Move PR target ref resolution to the utilities class Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/940 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:54:03 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:54:03 GMT Subject: Integrated: GitLab approval support missing asString In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 12:16:05 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > This minor fix makes the approval button support for GitLab work properly. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: c6d9e190 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/c6d9e190 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 2 mod GitLab approval support missing asString Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/941 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 4 15:54:14 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 4 Nov 2020 15:54:14 GMT Subject: Integrated: Ensure that a check that no longer requires a refresh is removed from the list In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Nov 2020 13:09:14 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > When a check transitions from needing a periodic refresh to stable, it should be removed from the list of PRs that needs a refresh. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 5b49aacb Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/5b49aacb Stats: 3 lines in 1 file changed: 2 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Ensure that a check that no longer requires a refresh is removed from the list Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/942 From kartikohri13 at gmail.com Wed Nov 4 19:28:49 2020 From: kartikohri13 at gmail.com (Kartik Ohri) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 00:58:49 +0530 Subject: Raising JDK to 15 In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Any kind of feedback is appreciated :) On Tue, Nov 3, 2020 at 8:42 PM Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > It has been some time since Java 15 was released. It might make sense to > raise the JDK level required for building project Skara to Java 15. This > will help the project to utilise text blocks. If there is no objection to > this, I would be happy to create and submit a patch using Text Blocks in > the project where it is useful. > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik > From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 09:09:10 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:09:10 GMT Subject: RFR: Allow targeting non-open issues with the label command Message-ID: <8MjM4sMUDLQq2cvDEdMWG1ffix2j7MwJiH8jaT3XqG0=.a55ff0bb-b05b-4629-bee0-322b023e864d@github.com> Add a warning to the PR body instead if a non-open issues is targeted (unless the PR is marked as a backport). ------------- Commit messages: - Allow targeting non-open issues Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/943/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=943&range=00 Stats: 81 lines in 3 files changed: 77 ins; 4 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/943.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/943/head:pull/943 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/943 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 09:12:40 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:12:40 GMT Subject: RFR: Allow targeting non-open issues with the label command In-Reply-To: <8MjM4sMUDLQq2cvDEdMWG1ffix2j7MwJiH8jaT3XqG0=.a55ff0bb-b05b-4629-bee0-322b023e864d@github.com> References: <8MjM4sMUDLQq2cvDEdMWG1ffix2j7MwJiH8jaT3XqG0=.a55ff0bb-b05b-4629-bee0-322b023e864d@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:06:33 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Add a warning to the PR body instead if a non-open issues is targeted (unless the PR is marked as a backport). Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/943 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 09:29:16 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:29:16 GMT Subject: Integrated: Allow targeting non-open issues with the label command In-Reply-To: <8MjM4sMUDLQq2cvDEdMWG1ffix2j7MwJiH8jaT3XqG0=.a55ff0bb-b05b-4629-bee0-322b023e864d@github.com> References: <8MjM4sMUDLQq2cvDEdMWG1ffix2j7MwJiH8jaT3XqG0=.a55ff0bb-b05b-4629-bee0-322b023e864d@github.com> Message-ID: <1FnOBsOqR4VnYyAXs-DT9guiN7x_YTDL_MqeB21Cado=.85ab02d5-73dc-467f-874a-66fd08ee1ef0@github.com> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 09:06:33 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Add a warning to the PR body instead if a non-open issues is targeted (unless the PR is marked as a backport). This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 5045eeb5 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/5045eeb5 Stats: 81 lines in 3 files changed: 77 ins; 4 del; 0 mod Allow targeting non-open issues with the label command Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/943 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 10:04:29 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:04:29 GMT Subject: RFR: 768: Skara bot should prevent attempt to use JBS backport issue ID in PR Message-ID: Check that the issue type is of an allowed type. ------------- Commit messages: - Add warning regarding unknown issue types Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=944&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-768 Stats: 74 lines in 5 files changed: 6 ins; 61 del; 7 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/944/head:pull/944 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 10:13:19 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:13:19 GMT Subject: RFR: 768: Skara bot should prevent attempt to use JBS backport issue ID in PR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <--n5odSwxGunoq6s_biXLqL1yQEc5h837z-iXtPbjdI=.a937a4bf-2dd6-4861-ad35-1c89f266918d@github.com> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:01:38 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Check that the issue type is of an allowed type. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 10:49:58 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:49:58 GMT Subject: Integrated: 768: Skara bot should prevent attempt to use JBS backport issue ID in PR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:01:38 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Check that the issue type is of an allowed type. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 4d7471a4 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/4d7471a4 Stats: 74 lines in 5 files changed: 6 ins; 61 del; 7 mod 768: Skara bot should prevent attempt to use JBS backport issue ID in PR Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 13:01:07 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:01:07 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: add /backport commit command Message-ID: Hi all, please review this patch that adds the `/backport` [commit command](https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Commit+Commands#CommitCommands-/backport). Testing: - [x] Added four new unit tests - [x] `make test` passes on Linux x64 Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - pr: add /backport command Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=945&range=00 Stats: 468 lines in 7 files changed: 464 ins; 0 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/945/head:pull/945 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From erikj at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 13:55:40 2020 From: erikj at openjdk.java.net (Erik Joelsson) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:55:40 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Nov 2020 11:09:28 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. >> >> (This is to support makefiles) > > Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Rename "tabfiles" to "ignore-tabs" Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer). ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:25:01 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:25:01 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 13:53:27 GMT, Erik Joelsson wrote: >> Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Rename "tabfiles" to "ignore-tabs" > > Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer). Looks good in general, but would be nice with a test to see that it still flags trailing tabs (which I think it is meant to do still, right?) ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:30:52 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:30:52 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: add /backport commit command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:58:24 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the `/backport` [commit command](https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Commit+Commands#CommitCommands-/backport). > > Testing: > - [x] Added four new unit tests > - [x] `make test` passes on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good, only some minor comments! bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/BackportCommand.java line 64: > 62: var username = command.user().username(); > 63: if (censusInstance.contributor(command.user()).isEmpty()) { > 64: reply.println("@" + username + " only OpenJDK [contributor](https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#contributor) can use the `/backport` command"); Perhaps "only an" or only .. contributors? bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/BackportCommand.java line 64: > 62: var username = command.user().username(); > 63: if (censusInstance.contributor(command.user()).isEmpty()) { > 64: reply.println("@" + username + " only OpenJDK [contributor](https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#contributor) can use the `/backport` command"); The command handler will prefix the reply with `@command-issuer` so should not need to do that manually. ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:39:31 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:39:31 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: add /backport commit command [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the `/backport` [commit command](https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Commit+Commands#CommitCommands-/backport). > > Testing: > - [x] Added four new unit tests > - [x] `make test` passes on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik Erik Helin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Wording ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945/files/e9860704..deefe5fe Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=945&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=945&range=00-01 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/945/head:pull/945 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:39:32 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:39:32 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: add /backport commit command [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:26:04 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Erik Helin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Wording > > bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/BackportCommand.java line 64: > >> 62: var username = command.user().username(); >> 63: if (censusInstance.contributor(command.user()).isEmpty()) { >> 64: reply.println("@" + username + " only OpenJDK [contributor](https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#contributor) can use the `/backport` command"); > > Perhaps "only an" or only .. contributors? Thanks, fixed! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:39:33 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:39:33 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: add /backport commit command [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <_bjx3Y2XwFsjZnzQQaldM0WJWf_2Y9eOwQ6o_mUHnOw=.7824581d-3c3d-4377-a6c4-18e0597f4f7d@github.com> On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:28:25 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Erik Helin has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: >> >> Wording > > bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/BackportCommand.java line 64: > >> 62: var username = command.user().username(); >> 63: if (censusInstance.contributor(command.user()).isEmpty()) { >> 64: reply.println("@" + username + " only OpenJDK [contributor](https://openjdk.java.net/bylaws#contributor) can use the `/backport` command"); > > The command handler will prefix the reply with `@command-issuer` so should not need to do that manually. Scratch that, it's only done for regular pull requests commands.. Something to fix another day. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 5 14:39:34 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:39:34 GMT Subject: Integrated: pr: add /backport commit command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 12:58:24 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the `/backport` [commit command](https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/Commit+Commands#CommitCommands-/backport). > > Testing: > - [x] Added four new unit tests > - [x] `make test` passes on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 9a725bbb Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/9a725bbb Stats: 468 lines in 7 files changed: 464 ins; 0 del; 4 mod pr: add /backport commit command Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/945 From kcr at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 6 17:11:32 2020 From: kcr at openjdk.java.net (Kevin Rushforth) Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 17:11:32 GMT Subject: RFR: 768: Skara bot should prevent attempt to use JBS backport issue ID in PR In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 10:01:38 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Check that the issue type is of an allowed type. bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 65: > 63: private static final String fullNameWarningMarker = ""; > 64: private static final Pattern BACKPORT_PATTERN = Pattern.compile(""); > 65: private final static Set primaryTypes = Set.of("Bug", "New Feature", "Enhancement", "Task", "Sub-task"); ?? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/944 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:26:38 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:26:38 GMT Subject: RFR: Run skara pre-submit tests against the latest commit on the target branch Message-ID: If possible, the pre-submit tests should merge the latest content from the target branch to increase the odds of detecting problems that would otherwise remain undetected until actual integration. This is similar to how actions normally run within the context of a PR. ------------- Commit messages: - Fix trailing whitespace - Initial version Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/946/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=946&range=00 Stats: 110 lines in 1 file changed: 93 ins; 0 del; 17 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/946.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/946/head:pull/946 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/946 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:34:05 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:34:05 GMT Subject: RFR: Run skara pre-submit tests against the latest commit on the target branch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:19:00 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If possible, the pre-submit tests should merge the latest content from the target branch to increase the odds of detecting problems that would otherwise remain undetected until actual integration. This is similar to how actions normally run within the context of a PR. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/946 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:42:24 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:42:24 GMT Subject: Integrated: forge: return commit comment from addCommitComment Message-ID: Hi all, please review this patch that makes `HostedRepository.addCommitComment` return the newly created commit comment. I had to make a workaround for GitLab's REST API since it doesn't return an id for commit comment. Instead we calculate an id based on the hash, the user's id an the time the comment was created. Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - small update to id - forge: return commit comment in addCommitComment Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/947/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=947&range=00 Stats: 21 lines in 5 files changed: 7 ins; 0 del; 14 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/947.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/947/head:pull/947 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/947 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:42:24 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:42:24 GMT Subject: Integrated: forge: return commit comment from addCommitComment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:37:46 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that makes `HostedRepository.addCommitComment` return the newly created commit comment. I had to make a workaround for GitLab's REST API since it doesn't return an id for commit comment. Instead we calculate an id based on the hash, the user's id an the time the comment was created. > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/947 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:42:25 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:42:25 GMT Subject: Integrated: forge: return commit comment from addCommitComment In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:37:46 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that makes `HostedRepository.addCommitComment` return the newly created commit comment. I had to make a workaround for GitLab's REST API since it doesn't return an id for commit comment. Instead we calculate an id based on the hash, the user's id an the time the comment was created. > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: dd7933bb Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/dd7933bb Stats: 21 lines in 5 files changed: 7 ins; 0 del; 14 mod forge: return commit comment from addCommitComment Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/947 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 11:43:23 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:43:23 GMT Subject: Integrated: Run skara pre-submit tests against the latest commit on the target branch In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 11:19:00 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If possible, the pre-submit tests should merge the latest content from the target branch to increase the odds of detecting problems that would otherwise remain undetected until actual integration. This is similar to how actions normally run within the context of a PR. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: c73f2b03 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/c73f2b03 Stats: 110 lines in 1 file changed: 93 ins; 0 del; 17 mod Run skara pre-submit tests against the latest commit on the target branch Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/946 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 9 19:49:53 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:49:53 GMT Subject: RFR: cli: add command git-backport Message-ID: Hi all, please review this patch that adds the new CLI command `git backport`. A contributing backporting a commit can now simply run `git backport --from=jdk ` to backport a commit from the JDK repo targeting the current repository. The "other" direction is also possible, where the user runs the command in a local clone of their personal fork of the jdk repository: `git backport --to=jdk16u `. The user can optionally supply a branch, as in `git backport --to=jfx --branch=jfx14 `. Behind the scenes the `git backport` do nothing more than just making a "backport" commit comment on the given hash. Testing: - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - cli: add command git-backport Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=948&range=00 Stats: 220 lines in 2 files changed: 219 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/948/head:pull/948 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 10 14:15:10 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:15:10 GMT Subject: RFR: cli: add command git-backport In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:46:57 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the new CLI command `git backport`. A contributing backporting a commit can now simply run `git backport --from=jdk ` to backport a commit from the JDK repo targeting the current repository. The "other" direction is also possible, where the user runs the command in a local clone of their personal fork of the jdk repository: `git backport --to=jdk16u `. The user can optionally supply a branch, as in `git backport --to=jfx --branch=jfx14 `. > > Behind the scenes the `git backport` do nothing more than just making a "backport" commit comment on the given hash. > > Testing: > - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 10 14:15:15 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:15:15 GMT Subject: RFR: Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration Message-ID: If the jcheck configuration requires a certain commit message for merges, attempt to ensure that a merge PR result in a conforming message. ------------- Commit messages: - Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=949&range=00 Stats: 126 lines in 2 files changed: 109 ins; 4 del; 13 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/949/head:pull/949 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 10 14:15:15 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:15:15 GMT Subject: RFR: Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:10:17 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If the jcheck configuration requires a certain commit message for merges, attempt to ensure that a merge PR result in a conforming message. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 08:44:08 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:44:08 GMT Subject: RFR: Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > If the jcheck configuration requires a certain commit message for merges, attempt to ensure that a merge PR result in a conforming message. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Allow reviewers, contributors and summaries for merge PRs ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949/files/4037154b..89ce463e Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=949&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=949&range=00-01 Stats: 8 lines in 2 files changed: 3 ins; 3 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/949/head:pull/949 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 08:59:16 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 08:59:16 GMT Subject: RFR: Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > If the jcheck configuration requires a certain commit message for merges, attempt to ensure that a merge PR result in a conforming message. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Fix failing test ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949/files/89ce463e..de347035 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=949&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=949&range=01-02 Stats: 20 lines in 1 file changed: 5 ins; 12 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/949/head:pull/949 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 13:20:12 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:20:12 GMT Subject: Integrated: Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:10:17 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If the jcheck configuration requires a certain commit message for merges, attempt to ensure that a merge PR result in a conforming message. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 4afd9958 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/4afd9958 Stats: 146 lines in 4 files changed: 116 ins; 18 del; 12 mod Restrict merge PR commit titles if required by the jcheck configuration Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/949 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 13:32:24 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:32:24 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: return HostedCommit from CheckRun.backportedFrom Message-ID: <8PRwX4MLnckWr8a7a95TEdL4fcZgSDomSbtCYlzihMo=.a3ee8b57-dc6a-422a-84b3-ef227648c1c2@github.com> Hi all, please review this small refactoring that makes `CheckRun.backportedFrom` return the `HostedCommit` instead of just a `Hash`. Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - pr: return Commit from CheckRun.backportedFrom Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/950/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=950&range=00 Stats: 20 lines in 1 file changed: 8 ins; 7 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/950.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/950/head:pull/950 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/950 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 13:53:37 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:53:37 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: return HostedCommit from CheckRun.backportedFrom In-Reply-To: <8PRwX4MLnckWr8a7a95TEdL4fcZgSDomSbtCYlzihMo=.a3ee8b57-dc6a-422a-84b3-ef227648c1c2@github.com> References: <8PRwX4MLnckWr8a7a95TEdL4fcZgSDomSbtCYlzihMo=.a3ee8b57-dc6a-422a-84b3-ef227648c1c2@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:29:39 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small refactoring that makes `CheckRun.backportedFrom` return the `HostedCommit` instead of just a `Hash`. > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/950 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:15:37 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:15:37 GMT Subject: RFR: vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs Message-ID: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> Hi all, please review this patch that adds the new class `DiffComparator` in `vcs` for comparing `Diff`s. I've also updated `CheckRun` to make use of this new class. Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=951&range=00 Stats: 189 lines in 2 files changed: 105 ins; 82 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/951/head:pull/951 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:18:10 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:18:10 GMT Subject: Integrated: cli: add command git-backport In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 9 Nov 2020 19:46:57 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the new CLI command `git backport`. A contributing backporting a commit can now simply run `git backport --from=jdk ` to backport a commit from the JDK repo targeting the current repository. The "other" direction is also possible, where the user runs the command in a local clone of their personal fork of the jdk repository: `git backport --to=jdk16u `. The user can optionally supply a branch, as in `git backport --to=jfx --branch=jfx14 `. > > Behind the scenes the `git backport` do nothing more than just making a "backport" commit comment on the given hash. > > Testing: > - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 4f35b6fd Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/4f35b6fd Stats: 220 lines in 2 files changed: 219 ins; 0 del; 1 mod cli: add command git-backport Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:20:18 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:20:18 GMT Subject: Integrated: pr: return HostedCommit from CheckRun.backportedFrom In-Reply-To: <8PRwX4MLnckWr8a7a95TEdL4fcZgSDomSbtCYlzihMo=.a3ee8b57-dc6a-422a-84b3-ef227648c1c2@github.com> References: <8PRwX4MLnckWr8a7a95TEdL4fcZgSDomSbtCYlzihMo=.a3ee8b57-dc6a-422a-84b3-ef227648c1c2@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 13:29:39 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small refactoring that makes `CheckRun.backportedFrom` return the `HostedCommit` instead of just a `Hash`. > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 2e35aff6 Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/2e35aff6 Stats: 20 lines in 1 file changed: 8 ins; 7 del; 5 mod pr: return HostedCommit from CheckRun.backportedFrom Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/950 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:21:10 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:21:10 GMT Subject: RFR: vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs [v2] In-Reply-To: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> References: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> Message-ID: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the new class `DiffComparator` in `vcs` for comparing `Diff`s. I've also updated `CheckRun` to make use of this new class. > > Thanks, > Erik Erik Helin has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951/files/48da62ba..48da62ba Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=951&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=951&range=00-01 Stats: 0 lines in 0 files changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/951/head:pull/951 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:21:12 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:21:12 GMT Subject: RFR: vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs [v2] In-Reply-To: References: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:18:50 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> please review this patch that adds the new class `DiffComparator` in `vcs` for comparing `Diff`s. I've also updated `CheckRun` to make use of this new class. >> >> Thanks, >> Erik > > Erik Helin has updated the pull request with a new target base due to a merge or a rebase. The incremental webrev excludes the unrelated changes brought in by the merge/rebase. Looks obviously correct, but perhaps some test would be nice to have at some point. :) ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 14:27:32 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:27:32 GMT Subject: Integrated: vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs In-Reply-To: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> References: <9EfGr0x509-ZDAcqz-_H8dtja0qdbhHqpgMzjYwenL8=.71d42621-52fb-442c-be93-da4af7a851ee@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 14:13:01 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that adds the new class `DiffComparator` in `vcs` for comparing `Diff`s. I've also updated `CheckRun` to make use of this new class. > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 0a8b1e74 Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/0a8b1e74 Stats: 189 lines in 2 files changed: 105 ins; 82 del; 2 mod vcs: add DiffComparator for comparing diffs Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/951 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 17:39:00 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:39:00 GMT Subject: RFR: Only consider resolved backports when applying sync label Message-ID: Issues that are still open should not be considered when calculating which issues should have the sync label applied. ------------- Commit messages: - Only consider resolved issues when labelling backports Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=952&range=00 Stats: 33 lines in 2 files changed: 30 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/952/head:pull/952 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 17:55:25 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:55:25 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v4] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. > > (This is to support makefiles) Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Add tests of ignore-tabs jcheck functionality. ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929/files/4aaa659f..0a196994 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=03 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=929&range=02-03 Stats: 70 lines in 1 file changed: 62 ins; 2 del; 6 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/929/head:pull/929 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ihse at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 17:55:25 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:55:25 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 5 Nov 2020 14:22:51 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Marked as reviewed by erikj (Reviewer). > > Looks good in general, but would be nice with a test to see that it still flags trailing tabs (which I think it is meant to do still, right?) @rwestberg @edvbld I have now added a test that verifies that trailing tabs are always rejected, and that leading tabs are accepted iff ignore-tabs is true for that file. Ok to integrate now? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 11 19:19:25 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 11 Nov 2020 19:19:25 GMT Subject: RFR: Only consider resolved backports when applying sync label In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:36:19 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Issues that are still open should not be considered when calculating which issues should have the sync label applied. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 09:01:16 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 09:01:16 GMT Subject: RFR: Only consider resolved backports when applying sync label [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Issues that are still open should not be considered when calculating which issues should have the sync label applied. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Fix failing test ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952/files/4229cfb8..f943734e Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=952&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=952&range=00-01 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 4 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/952/head:pull/952 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 10:03:09 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:03:09 GMT Subject: RFR: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration [v4] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:55:25 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. >> >> (This is to support makefiles) > > Magnus Ihse Bursie has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Add tests of ignore-tabs jcheck functionality. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 10:33:57 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 10:33:57 GMT Subject: Integrated: Only consider resolved backports when applying sync label In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Nov 2020 17:36:19 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Issues that are still open should not be considered when calculating which issues should have the sync label applied. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 38aa5bf1 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/38aa5bf1 Stats: 37 lines in 3 files changed: 34 ins; 0 del; 3 mod Only consider resolved backports when applying sync label Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/952 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 11:04:29 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:04:29 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:24:38 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. > > I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. > > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Looks good, just a small suggestion on the helptext for the option. I updated the documentation at https://wiki.openjdk.java.net/display/SKARA/reviewer. cli/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/cli/pr/GitPrReviewer.java line 37: > 35: .fullname("credit") > 36: .describe("USERNAME") > 37: .helptext("Consider pull request reviewed by this user") Suggestion: .helptext("Credit a person as a reviewer of this pull request") ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 11:16:27 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:16:27 GMT Subject: RFR: git-pr: update git-pr -h Message-ID: Hi all, please review this small update to `git pr -h` that adds some missing sub-commands to the help output. Testing: - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - git-pr: update git-pr -h Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/953/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=953&range=00 Stats: 6 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/953.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/953/head:pull/953 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/953 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 11:16:28 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:16:28 GMT Subject: RFR: git-pr: update git-pr -h In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:12:20 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small update to `git pr -h` that adds some missing sub-commands to the help output. > > Testing: > - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/953 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 11:25:14 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:25:14 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6DJYELbsEfoPlIcfBCkEszQ15rxAOx0qDSFnJ27pIak=.f8df6902-caba-4f2e-9255-ae6eba1d849e@github.com> > Hi! > The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. > > I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. > > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Kartik Ohri has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Improve helptext for git-pr-reviewer --credit Co-authored-by: Erik Duveblad ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938/files/e6dfcc8c..f9b5ce90 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=938&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=938&range=00-01 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/938/head:pull/938 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 12 12:32:01 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2020 12:32:01 GMT Subject: Integrated: SKARA-725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Nov 2020 17:24:38 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > The patch renames the add option to the credit in accordance with the change in the `/reviewer` command on OpenJDK Github bot. > > I was unable to find any related documentation that should reflect this change. If something needs to be updated, kindly point me to it and I'll do the needful changes. > > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: f4dc83b6 Author: Kartik Ohri Committer: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/f4dc83b6 Stats: 8 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 2 del; 6 mod 725: Rename git-pr-reviewer --add to git-pr-reviewer --credit Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/938 From shade at redhat.com Mon Nov 16 12:06:17 2020 From: shade at redhat.com (Aleksey Shipilev) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:06:17 +0100 Subject: UX Request: Fighting with bots over the first comment Message-ID: <5e88ffd6-1d9e-96ea-d53e-4fb8dbd63ece@redhat.com> Hi, Recently I found myself participating in edit wars with OpenJDK bots over the first PR comment. See the edit history for this comment, for example: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1220#issue-521558406 I think it would be a much better UX if bots did not get into the way. Off the top of my head, I see the following options: *) Make sure bots are not updating the first comment frequently. Say, with 30 second cooldown? This gives user a window to reapply and commit the changes to first comment before bots clash. *) When bots experience the edit conflict, let them back off for a few minutes, allowing user edits to continue? *) Radical: make bots to post their own comment (hopefully a second one in PR), and update that one instead. What do you think? -- Thanks, -Aleksey From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com Mon Nov 16 13:02:27 2020 From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 14:02:27 +0100 Subject: UX Request: Fighting with bots over the first comment In-Reply-To: <5e88ffd6-1d9e-96ea-d53e-4fb8dbd63ece@redhat.com> References: <5e88ffd6-1d9e-96ea-d53e-4fb8dbd63ece@redhat.com> Message-ID: <0e2d30f7-1165-d2e0-6cbc-65c800814c87@oracle.com> On 2020-11-16 13:06, Aleksey Shipilev wrote: > Hi, > > Recently I found myself participating in edit wars with OpenJDK bots > over the first PR comment. > > See the edit history for this comment, for example: > ? https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1220#issue-521558406 > > I think it would be a much better UX if bots did not get into the way. > > Off the top of my head, I see the following options: > ?*) Make sure bots are not updating the first comment frequently. Say, > with 30 second cooldown? This gives user a window to reapply and > commit the changes to first comment before bots clash. > ?*) When bots experience the edit conflict, let them back off for a > few minutes, allowing user edits to continue? > ?*) Radical: make bots to post their own comment (hopefully a second > one in PR), and update that one instead. I like your radical idea. There is already the "Welcome back" post by bridgekeeper (which does not convey much information for us recurring developers). I think it would be better if the bots updated this comment instead. (With the possible exception of the checklist, since a summary of that is presented in the overview, and I assume this is only for checkmark items that are present in the main description.) /Magnus > > What do you think? > From ihse at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 16 13:08:19 2020 From: ihse at openjdk.java.net (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 13:08:19 GMT Subject: Integrated: Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <-NBKr-iK1ZcWdGb50kDjp03bdt1uf3fcurVLMLn6uTY=.bbecbe46-e807-464c-b6c7-47ba3f0aa920@github.com> On Thu, 29 Oct 2020 00:53:16 GMT, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > The tabfiles setting is just like the files setting, but it lists files in which tabs are allowed. > > (This is to support makefiles) This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: d468590c Author: Magnus Ihse Bursie Committer: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/d468590c Stats: 95 lines in 3 files changed: 72 ins; 9 del; 14 mod Add tabfiles to jcheck configuration Reviewed-by: erikj, ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/929 From serb at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 16 21:27:15 2020 From: serb at openjdk.java.net (Sergey Bylokhov) Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2020 21:27:15 GMT Subject: RFR: cli: add command git-backport In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 10 Nov 2020 14:12:52 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> please review this patch that adds the new CLI command `git backport`. A contributing backporting a commit can now simply run `git backport --from=jdk ` to backport a commit from the JDK repo targeting the current repository. The "other" direction is also possible, where the user runs the command in a local clone of their personal fork of the jdk repository: `git backport --to=jdk16u `. The user can optionally supply a branch, as in `git backport --to=jfx --branch=jfx14 `. >> >> Behind the scenes the `git backport` do nothing more than just making a "backport" commit comment on the given hash. >> >> Testing: >> - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 >> >> Thanks, >> Erik > > Looks good! For some reason, I do not see backport command in the Skara help even on the freshly recloned version of skara, what could go wrong? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/948 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 17 05:53:18 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 05:53:18 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command Message-ID: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command ------------- Commit messages: - Add /check command to manually execute jcheck Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=954&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-758 Stats: 24 lines in 2 files changed: 23 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/954/head:pull/954 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 17 06:46:23 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 06:46:23 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Hi! > Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). > > I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Kartik Ohri has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Do not alter bot recheck schedule ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954/files/5f703c4f..edcd068d Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=954&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=954&range=00-01 Stats: 21 lines in 1 file changed: 19 ins; 0 del; 2 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/954/head:pull/954 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From rwestrel at redhat.com Tue Nov 17 08:58:51 2020 From: rwestrel at redhat.com (Roland Westrelin) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 09:58:51 +0100 Subject: reviewer attribution Message-ID: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> Hi Skara Developers, My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great work. I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without all involved reviewers credited. The PR is: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". Roland. From akozlov at azul.com Tue Nov 17 11:47:39 2020 From: akozlov at azul.com (Anton Kozlov) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 14:47:39 +0300 Subject: Merge-style PR for a project Message-ID: <46d062b2-50a5-dec6-69ba-7d7d59052016@azul.com> Hi, Could you explain a bit or provide links to wiki/maillist how to use merge-style pull requests? I have problems with https://github.com/openjdk/aarch64-port/pull/6. (a missing newline on reviewer line is not really important) Should the merge commit message be just "Merge"? Was https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/pull/257 and https://github.com/openjdk/valhalla/pull/257/commits/0f62c4f5ff9797d303a93ddabc5c5c2b62d17cbf acceptable before the check introduced? What if I have few commits before and/or after the merge commit (it's "and" in this PR). What to expect after the "/integrate"? PS. Thanks for all hard work made for git transition possible, and for continuing efforts. Thanks, Anton From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com Tue Nov 17 13:01:09 2020 From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 05:01:09 -0800 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> Message-ID: <795e9342-089d-e839-ac99-6f260a10e4ad@oracle.com> My experience with this on JavaFX is that once people get used to the idea of doing the review on GitHub, it isn't really a problem. I view this as (mostly) a step forward not a step backwards, since the review approval is explicit and you don't need to guess whether a reviewer is satisfied that all their concerns have been addressed. Having said that, I do like the idea of being able to manually add a "non-counting" reviewer manually, which is useful for those interacting with the mailing list. That seems to be working well. However, once a reviewer has done a review on GitHub, and has requested changes, I think it would be wrong to override that. -- Kevin On 11/17/2020 12:58 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote: > Hi Skara Developers, > > My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great > work. > > I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size > under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one > reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change > is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer > attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record > the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. > > To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial > where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that > even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer > attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers > for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer > command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare > case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't > explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all > reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without > all involved reviewers credited. > > The PR is: > > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 > > but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve > the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". > > Roland. > From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 17 16:10:15 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:10:15 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: relaxed matching of backport PR titles Message-ID: Hi all, please review this patch that makes the matching for "backport" style pull requests a bit more relaxed with regards to whitespace. Testing: - [x] Added three new unit tests Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - pr: relaxed matching of backport PR titles Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/955/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=955&range=00 Stats: 178 lines in 2 files changed: 177 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/955.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/955/head:pull/955 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/955 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 17 16:14:03 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:14:03 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1EA7DaTfyE8upSFJjF8FUlkfmKSHgoHc15_RarSFcCs=.e9ae8891-ba06-4168-8e42-e53cd21814ad@github.com> On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 05:46:35 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > Hi! > Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). > > I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Hi @amCap1712, thanks for working on this! Please consider adding a unit test for the `/check` command, see e.g. [SummaryTests.java](https://github.com/openjdk/skara/blob/master/bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/SummaryTests.java) for an example of a unit test for a pull request command. Thanks, Erik ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From philip.race at oracle.com Tue Nov 17 18:02:36 2020 From: philip.race at oracle.com (Philip Race) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 10:02:36 -0800 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: <795e9342-089d-e839-ac99-6f260a10e4ad@oracle.com> References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> <795e9342-089d-e839-ac99-6f260a10e4ad@oracle.com> Message-ID: <5FB4103C.8040305@oracle.com> I can appreciate that there are complex changes that take weeks of back and forth and maybe someone was actively reviewing and maybe the major reviewer, and just happened not to be there at the every end when everything is ready and might be miffed they aren't credited. -phil. On 11/17/20, 5:01 AM, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > My experience with this on JavaFX is that once people get used to the > idea of doing the review on GitHub, it isn't really a problem. I view > this as (mostly) a step forward not a step backwards, since the review > approval is explicit and you don't need to guess whether a reviewer is > satisfied that all their concerns have been addressed. > > Having said that, I do like the idea of being able to manually add a > "non-counting" reviewer manually, which is useful for those > interacting with the mailing list. That seems to be working well. > However, once a reviewer has done a review on GitHub, and has > requested changes, I think it would be wrong to override that. > > -- Kevin > > > On 11/17/2020 12:58 AM, Roland Westrelin wrote: >> Hi Skara Developers, >> >> My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great >> work. >> >> I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size >> under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one >> reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change >> is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer >> attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record >> the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. >> >> To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial >> where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that >> even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer >> attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers >> for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer >> command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare >> case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't >> explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all >> reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without >> all involved reviewers credited. >> >> The PR is: >> >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 >> >> but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve >> the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". >> >> Roland. >> > From cjashfor at linux.ibm.com Tue Nov 17 20:59:55 2020 From: cjashfor at linux.ibm.com (Corey Ashford) Date: Tue, 17 Nov 2020 12:59:55 -0800 Subject: Question about when mailing list postings are made following a PR Message-ID: <270fb95f-5197-0159-fc53-9215723e10ce@linux.ibm.com> Hello, I made a new PR two days ago: https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1245 It was automatically labeled with hotspot-compiler but I haven't seen any posting on the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list. What is the criteria for making an automatic posting on the mailing list? Thanks for your consideration, - Corey Corey Ashford Software Engineer IBM Systems, LTC OpenJDK team 503-985-8699 Home office cjashfor at us.ibm.com IBM From david.holmes at oracle.com Wed Nov 18 02:47:55 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:47:55 +1000 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> Message-ID: <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> On 17/11/2020 6:58 pm, Roland Westrelin wrote: > > Hi Skara Developers, > > My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great > work. > > I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size > under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one > reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change > is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer > attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record > the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. I agree that this is a problem. There is a case to be made that reviewers just have to get used to going back to the PR and clicking "Approve", and that developers have to wait until the reviewers have done so. But that is contrary to our position that we don't block integrations until the approvals are in place, to allow for trivial final updates. It is common (for me at least) to do a review and select "comment" or "changes requested" for minor issues. They then get fixed, but I don't get listed as a Reviewer unless I go back and rubber stamp them. I've started doing that but it is a bit of a pain. On the flip side someone who just makes a passing comment shouldn't automatically get the credit, or responsibility, of being a reviewer. I don't see a solution other than allowing a manual override as Roland suggests. Cheers, David ----- > To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial > where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that > even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer > attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers > for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer > command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare > case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't > explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all > reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without > all involved reviewers credited. > > The PR is: > > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 > > but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve > the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". > > Roland. > From tobias.hartmann at oracle.com Wed Nov 18 06:28:53 2020 From: tobias.hartmann at oracle.com (Tobias Hartmann) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:28:53 +0100 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> Message-ID: <63403f54-97b4-e4e8-c48e-96743d3c7020@oracle.com> +1 on trusting our committers and allowing a manual overwrite. The bot could issue a warning / notification to the corresponding reviewer who could then still object. Best regards, Tobias On 18.11.20 03:47, David Holmes wrote: > On 17/11/2020 6:58 pm, Roland Westrelin wrote: >> >> Hi Skara Developers, >> >> My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great >> work. >> >> I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size >> under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one >> reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change >> is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer >> attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record >> the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. > > I agree that this is a problem. There is a case to be made that reviewers just have to get used to > going back to the PR and clicking "Approve", and that developers have to wait until the reviewers > have done so. But that is contrary to our position that we don't block integrations until the > approvals are in place, to allow for trivial final updates. > > It is common (for me at least) to do a review and select "comment" or "changes requested" for minor > issues. They then get fixed, but I don't get listed as a Reviewer unless I go back and rubber stamp > them. I've started doing that but it is a bit of a pain. > > On the flip side someone who just makes a passing comment shouldn't automatically get the credit, or > responsibility, of being a reviewer. > > I don't see a solution other than allowing a manual override as Roland suggests. > > Cheers, > David > ----- > >> To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial >> where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that >> even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer >> attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers >> for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer >> command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare >> case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't >> explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all >> reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without >> all involved reviewers credited. >> >> The PR is: >> >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 >> >> but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve >> the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". >> >> Roland. >> From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 09:03:53 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:03:53 GMT Subject: Integrated: git-pr: update git-pr -h In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 11:12:20 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small update to `git pr -h` that adds some missing sub-commands to the help output. > > Testing: > - [x] Manual testing on Linux x64 > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 82958555 Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/82958555 Stats: 6 lines in 1 file changed: 6 ins; 0 del; 0 mod git-pr: update git-pr -h Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/953 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 09:14:21 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 09:14:21 GMT Subject: RFR: pr: relaxed matching of backport PR titles In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:07:12 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that makes the matching for "backport" style pull requests a bit more relaxed with regards to whitespace. > > Testing: > - [x] Added three new unit tests > > Thanks, > Erik Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/955 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 10:34:32 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:34:32 GMT Subject: RFR: Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests Message-ID: Sometimes GitLab returns merge request data that doesn't contain a head hash. Since we can't really do anything with these, just ignore them. ------------- Commit messages: - Filter out invalid MRs Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=956&range=00 Stats: 12 lines in 1 file changed: 12 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/956/head:pull/956 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 13:23:57 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:23:57 GMT Subject: RFR: Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <017qNc5KFPot9OpbUmi16L78oEwhLfq4mXoHjrkOWk0=.1e9b670a-1f4c-4bb7-94ee-b56db42e1e26@github.com> On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:31:49 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Sometimes GitLab returns merge request data that doesn't contain a head hash. Since we can't really do anything with these, just ignore them. Looks good, just a minor suggestion on how to make `mergeRequestValid` a bit shorter ?? forge/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/forge/gitlab/GitLabRepository.java line 126: > 124: > 125: return true; > 126: } Suggestion: private boolean hasHeadHash(JSONValue json) { return json.contains("sha") && !json.get("sha").isNull()); } forge/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/forge/gitlab/GitLabRepository.java line 133: > 131: .param("state", "opened") > 132: .execute().stream() > 133: .filter(this::mergeRequestValid) Suggestion: .filter(this::hasHeadHash) forge/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/forge/gitlab/GitLabRepository.java line 144: > 142: .param("updated_after", updatedAfter.format(DateTimeFormatter.ISO_DATE_TIME)) > 143: .execute().stream() > 144: .filter(this::mergeRequestValid) Suggestion: .filter(this::hasHeadHash) ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956 From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com Wed Nov 18 13:27:18 2020 From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 05:27:18 -0800 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> Message-ID: Manually adding a reviewer who has made comments, but not formally approved via the UI, seems a useful feature. I don't think tht manually adding a reviewer who has done a review requesting changes, which is the way you indicate that your comments are blocking, is such a good idea. It seems to me that the drawbacks outweigh any benefit. -- Kevin On 11/17/2020 6:47 PM, David Holmes wrote: > On 17/11/2020 6:58 pm, Roland Westrelin wrote: >> >> Hi Skara Developers, >> >> My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great >> work. >> >> I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size >> under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one >> reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change >> is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer >> attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record >> the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. > > I agree that this is a problem. There is a case to be made that > reviewers just have to get used to going back to the PR and clicking > "Approve", and that developers have to wait until the reviewers have > done so. But that is contrary to our position that we don't block > integrations until the approvals are in place, to allow for trivial > final updates. > > It is common (for me at least) to do a review and select "comment" or > "changes requested" for minor issues. They then get fixed, but I don't > get listed as a Reviewer unless I go back and rubber stamp them. I've > started doing that but it is a bit of a pain. > > On the flip side someone who just makes a passing comment shouldn't > automatically get the credit, or responsibility, of being a reviewer. > > I don't see a solution other than allowing a manual override as Roland > suggests. > > Cheers, > David > ----- > >> To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial >> where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that >> even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer >> attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers >> for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer >> command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare >> case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't >> explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all >> reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without >> all involved reviewers credited. >> >> The PR is: >> >> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 >> >> but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve >> the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". >> >> Roland. >> From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 13:27:25 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:27:25 GMT Subject: RFR: Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Sometimes GitLab returns merge request data that doesn't contain a head hash. Since we can't really do anything with these, just ignore them. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Apply suggestions from code review Co-authored-by: Erik Duveblad ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956/files/abdedc96..9c71d535 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=956&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=956&range=00-01 Stats: 9 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 5 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/956/head:pull/956 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 13:40:59 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:40:59 GMT Subject: RFR: Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <0pxqSwrk_y6Y6ulxW-szjPPO0ouEUWV1NzaKbuayFHA=.35fc0306-9baa-41c8-9a94-f425227e6494@github.com> > Sometimes GitLab returns merge request data that doesn't contain a head hash. Since we can't really do anything with these, just ignore them. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Make it actually compile ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956/files/9c71d535..1c708407 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=956&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=956&range=01-02 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/956/head:pull/956 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 13:59:19 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:59:19 GMT Subject: RFR: Always recheck in-progress checks Message-ID: <_vDijDxTB25IQU8vNEkejlhQYlLF6CAQR9a4H6Rr67k=.b7739154-0889-4cb7-90dc-03cab7aebc7a@github.com> If we end up wanting to run jcheck for a PR that has it marked as in progress, always rerun it. The only way this can happen is if the running check was interrupted (such as the process was killed), checks will never run concurrently for the same PR. ------------- Commit messages: - Always recheck in-progress checks Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/957/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=957&range=00 Stats: 34 lines in 1 file changed: 7 ins; 16 del; 11 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/957.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/957/head:pull/957 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/957 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:01:59 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:01:59 GMT Subject: RFR: Always recheck in-progress checks In-Reply-To: <_vDijDxTB25IQU8vNEkejlhQYlLF6CAQR9a4H6Rr67k=.b7739154-0889-4cb7-90dc-03cab7aebc7a@github.com> References: <_vDijDxTB25IQU8vNEkejlhQYlLF6CAQR9a4H6Rr67k=.b7739154-0889-4cb7-90dc-03cab7aebc7a@github.com> Message-ID: <6rpLEbxCOlAFvyEysE0ARRczBmP6PeVyl85tuvkH9TM=.3add3123-6fbe-4ae4-8d40-52d05c1aab1a@github.com> On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:56:36 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If we end up wanting to run jcheck for a PR that has it marked as in progress, always rerun it. The only way this can happen is if the running check was interrupted (such as the process was killed), checks will never run concurrently for the same PR. Looks good! ------------- Marked as reviewed by ehelin (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/957 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:02:06 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:02:06 GMT Subject: RFR: vcs: use correct loop variable Message-ID: Hi all, please review this small patch that updates `DiffComparator.java` to use the correct loop variable (sigh). Thanks, Erik ------------- Commit messages: - vcs: use correct loop variable Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/958/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=958&range=00 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 4 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/958.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/958/head:pull/958 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/958 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:02:06 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:02:06 GMT Subject: RFR: vcs: use correct loop variable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:58:16 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small patch that updates `DiffComparator.java` to use the correct loop variable (sigh). > > Thanks, > Erik Looks great! ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/958 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:02:39 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:02:39 GMT Subject: Integrated: pr: relaxed matching of backport PR titles In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:07:12 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this patch that makes the matching for "backport" style pull requests a bit more relaxed with regards to whitespace. > > Testing: > - [x] Added three new unit tests > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 1eb72e24 Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/1eb72e24 Stats: 178 lines in 2 files changed: 177 ins; 0 del; 1 mod pr: relaxed matching of backport PR titles Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/955 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:06:54 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:06:54 GMT Subject: Integrated: Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:31:49 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > Sometimes GitLab returns merge request data that doesn't contain a head hash. Since we can't really do anything with these, just ignore them. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: bccf2928 Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/bccf2928 Stats: 7 lines in 1 file changed: 7 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Filter out invalid GitLab merge requests Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/956 From ehelin at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:08:30 2020 From: ehelin at openjdk.java.net (Erik Helin) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:08:30 GMT Subject: Integrated: vcs: use correct loop variable In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:58:16 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: > Hi all, > > please review this small patch that updates `DiffComparator.java` to use the correct loop variable (sigh). > > Thanks, > Erik This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: 38390e57 Author: Erik Helin URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/38390e57 Stats: 4 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 4 mod vcs: use correct loop variable Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/958 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 18 14:19:24 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 14:19:24 GMT Subject: Integrated: Always recheck in-progress checks In-Reply-To: <_vDijDxTB25IQU8vNEkejlhQYlLF6CAQR9a4H6Rr67k=.b7739154-0889-4cb7-90dc-03cab7aebc7a@github.com> References: <_vDijDxTB25IQU8vNEkejlhQYlLF6CAQR9a4H6Rr67k=.b7739154-0889-4cb7-90dc-03cab7aebc7a@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:56:36 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: > If we end up wanting to run jcheck for a PR that has it marked as in progress, always rerun it. The only way this can happen is if the running check was interrupted (such as the process was killed), checks will never run concurrently for the same PR. This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: b88bdc2b Author: Robin Westberg URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/b88bdc2b Stats: 34 lines in 1 file changed: 7 ins; 16 del; 11 mod Always recheck in-progress checks Reviewed-by: ehelin ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/957 From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Nov 19 00:38:29 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:38:29 +1000 Subject: reviewer attribution In-Reply-To: References: <871rgsmkac.fsf@redhat.com> <23dab8ba-e785-5882-5300-d8e290e1c631@oracle.com> Message-ID: <3e5c1907-30fd-8e85-cbe1-2e280a45d0c2@oracle.com> On 18/11/2020 11:27 pm, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Manually adding a reviewer who has made comments, but not formally > approved via the UI, seems a useful feature. I don't think tht manually > adding a reviewer who has done a review requesting changes, which is the > way you indicate that your comments are blocking, is such a good idea. That depends on the nature of the comments/changes. > It seems to me that the drawbacks outweigh any benefit. The only drawbacks would be if someone misused the capability - and that is a people problem that can be addressed through education. The main issue here is not giving credit to reviewers when it should be given**, and not making the process too onerous for those reviewers by requiring that they always click "approve" after the final commit. ** not that that is at all relevant in my case :) Cheers, David > -- Kevin > > > On 11/17/2020 6:47 PM, David Holmes wrote: >> On 17/11/2020 6:58 pm, Roland Westrelin wrote: >>> >>> Hi Skara Developers, >>> >>> My experience with Skara has so far been painless. Thanks for the great >>> work. >>> >>> I noticed one of my PRs has 3 reviewers listed on the right hand size >>> under "reviewers" but a single one listed in the comments. Only that one >>> reviewer has approved the change with the github web interface. Change >>> is cleared for integration so I could push it without proper reviewer >>> attribution. I tried the /reviewer command to force the system to record >>> the 2 other reviewers but that doesn't help. >> >> I agree that this is a problem. There is a case to be made that >> reviewers just have to get used to going back to the PR and clicking >> "Approve", and that developers have to wait until the reviewers have >> done so. But that is contrary to our position that we don't block >> integrations until the approvals are in place, to allow for trivial >> final updates. >> >> It is common (for me at least) to do a review and select "comment" or >> "changes requested" for minor issues. They then get fixed, but I don't >> get listed as a Reviewer unless I go back and rubber stamp them. I've >> started doing that but it is a bit of a pain. >> >> On the flip side someone who just makes a passing comment shouldn't >> automatically get the credit, or responsibility, of being a reviewer. >> >> I don't see a solution other than allowing a manual override as Roland >> suggests. >> >> Cheers, >> David >> ----- >> >>> To me, this feels like a step backward from what we had with mercurial >>> where we were in full control of the reviewer list. There's a risk that >>> even careful developers could push a change without proper reviewer >>> attribution. Also, in the openjdk project, we largely trust developers >>> for doing the right thing. In that spirit, allowing the /reviewer >>> command full power on the reviewer list would make sense for the rare >>> case where it's obvious the change is good to go but someone hasn't >>> explicitly approved it. I feel it's better than having to chase all >>> reviewers to have them click a button or integrating a change without >>> all involved reviewers credited. >>> >>> The PR is: >>> >>> https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1003 >>> >>> but I emailed reviewers that were not credited to ask them to approve >>> the change so the reviewer list is in the process of being "fixed". >>> >>> Roland. >>> > From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Nov 19 00:46:07 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 10:46:07 +1000 Subject: Question about when mailing list postings are made following a PR In-Reply-To: <270fb95f-5197-0159-fc53-9215723e10ce@linux.ibm.com> References: <270fb95f-5197-0159-fc53-9215723e10ce@linux.ibm.com> Message-ID: <7ddf57c8-bfa7-553b-07c8-19abc7d9219f@oracle.com> Hi Corey, On 18/11/2020 6:59 am, Corey Ashford wrote: > > Hello, > > I made a new PR two days ago:? https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1245 > > It was automatically labeled with hotspot-compiler but I haven't seen > any posting on the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list. > > What is the criteria for making an automatic posting on the mailing list? AFAIK everything you did was correct. I've cc'd the hotspot-compiler-dev list owner so they can see if something when wrong on the mailman side. David ----- > > Thanks for your consideration, > > - Corey > > Corey Ashford > Software Engineer > IBM Systems, LTC OpenJDK team > 503-985-8699 Home office > cjashfor at us.ibm.com > > IBM From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 19 13:54:02 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 13:54:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Handle trailing blank lines in commit message Message-ID: This change ensures that a commit message ending with a blank line does not generate an exception. ------------- Commit messages: - Handle trailing blank lines in commit message Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/959/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=959&range=00 Stats: 27 lines in 2 files changed: 22 ins; 5 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/959.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/959/head:pull/959 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/959 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 19 14:20:21 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 19 Nov 2020 14:20:21 GMT Subject: RFR: Only consider backports with a proper link relationship Message-ID: If an issue links to a backport, it should only be consider an actual backport if the link type is correct (to avoid looking at backport issues linked as "related to" for example). ------------- Commit messages: - Only consider backports with a proper link relationship Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/960/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=960&range=00 Stats: 12 lines in 2 files changed: 12 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/960.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/960/head:pull/960 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/960 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 20 12:30:47 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:30:47 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Hi! > Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). > > I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. > Thanks. > Regards, > Kartik Kartik Ohri has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Add test for /check command ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954/files/edcd068d..aa61e47f Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=954&range=02 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=954&range=01-02 Stats: 47 lines in 1 file changed: 47 ins; 0 del; 0 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/954/head:pull/954 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 20 12:30:48 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:30:48 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: <1EA7DaTfyE8upSFJjF8FUlkfmKSHgoHc15_RarSFcCs=.e9ae8891-ba06-4168-8e42-e53cd21814ad@github.com> References: <1EA7DaTfyE8upSFJjF8FUlkfmKSHgoHc15_RarSFcCs=.e9ae8891-ba06-4168-8e42-e53cd21814ad@github.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 16:11:55 GMT, Erik Helin wrote: >> Hi! >> Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). >> >> I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. >> Thanks. >> Regards, >> Kartik > > Hi @amCap1712, thanks for working on this! > > Please consider adding a unit test for the `/check` command, see e.g. [SummaryTests.java](https://github.com/openjdk/skara/blob/master/bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/SummaryTests.java) for an example of a unit test for a pull request command. > > Thanks, > Erik Hi @edvbld, Thanks for the review. I have added a unit test as you asked. Let me know if any other changes are required. Regards, Kartik. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From cjashfor at linux.ibm.com Fri Nov 20 20:31:25 2020 From: cjashfor at linux.ibm.com (Corey Ashford) Date: Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:31:25 -0800 Subject: Question about when mailing list postings are made following a PR In-Reply-To: <7ddf57c8-bfa7-553b-07c8-19abc7d9219f@oracle.com> References: <270fb95f-5197-0159-fc53-9215723e10ce@linux.ibm.com> <7ddf57c8-bfa7-553b-07c8-19abc7d9219f@oracle.com> Message-ID: <0696ccff-15c9-5ef3-79c5-d8c893b8f574@linux.ibm.com> Thank you. - Corey On 11/18/20 4:46 PM, David Holmes wrote: > Hi Corey, > > On 18/11/2020 6:59 am, Corey Ashford wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> I made a new PR two days ago:? https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1245 >> >> It was automatically labeled with hotspot-compiler but I haven't seen >> any posting on the hotspot-compiler-dev mailing list. >> >> What is the criteria for making an automatic posting on the mailing list? > > AFAIK everything you did was correct. I've cc'd the hotspot-compiler-dev > list owner so they can see if something when wrong on the mailman side. > > David > ----- > >> >> Thanks for your consideration, >> >> - Corey >> >> Corey Ashford >> Software Engineer >> IBM Systems, LTC OpenJDK team >> 503-985-8699 Home office >> cjashfor at us.ibm.com >> >> IBM From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 23 10:39:32 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:39:32 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command [v3] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 20 Nov 2020 12:30:47 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: >> Hi! >> Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). >> >> I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. >> Thanks. >> Regards, >> Kartik > > Kartik Ohri has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Add test for /check command Changes requested by rwestberg (Reviewer). bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckCommand.java line 24: > 22: public void handle(PullRequestBot bot, PullRequest pr, CensusInstance censusInstance, Path scratchPath, CommandInvocation command, List allComments, PrintWriter reply) { > 23: try { > 24: var workItem = new CheckWorkItem(bot, pr, e -> {}); Don't think you actually have to do the check here, `CommandWorkItem` will schedule an additional check after every command anyway. But to force the check to run you'll need to ensure that the "metadata" of the existing check becomes invalid. If you update `metadataComments` in `CheckWorkItem` to add a special reply marker from the `/check` command, and ensure that the check command outputs it, I think thinks should work. bots/pr/src/test/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckCommandTests.java line 39: > 37: localRepo.push(editHash, author.url(), "edit", true); > 38: var pr = credentials.createPullRequest(author, "master", "edit", "This is a pull request"); > 39: pr.addComment("/check"); Looks like a good start, but it's possible that this test is a bit too simple. Would it still pass if you removed this line (as checking will occur anyway)? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Mon Nov 23 11:00:15 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 11:00:15 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Nov 2020 05:46:35 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: > I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. Yeah, sorry about that, it has not really been a priority as no-one else actually run them in "production". It can be a bit complicated to configure them properly for running stand-alone, but if you want to run a test against GitHub instead of the mock implementation that's a bit easier. If you want to try that I'll be happy to assist with the required configuration. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com Mon Nov 23 11:38:45 2020 From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 12:38:45 +0100 Subject: Auto closing of draft PRs..? Message-ID: <1440877b-e7a8-5fca-c31d-6def2a61399d@oracle.com> Hi, I just got a notification from a Skara bot that a PR I was subscribed to was about to be closed due to inactivity. However, the PR in question was a draft PR. This felt wrong. To me, a draft PR is a work-in-progress, where you can check up your results with the Skara bots, and fellow developers. As such, it might be avoid of activity for quite some time but still not be considered dead. I understand that there is a need to purge out abandonded PRs, but maybe the time limit could be greatly increased for draft PRs? /Magnus From kevin.rushforth at oracle.com Mon Nov 23 14:17:08 2020 From: kevin.rushforth at oracle.com (Kevin Rushforth) Date: Mon, 23 Nov 2020 06:17:08 -0800 Subject: Auto closing of draft PRs..? In-Reply-To: <1440877b-e7a8-5fca-c31d-6def2a61399d@oracle.com> References: <1440877b-e7a8-5fca-c31d-6def2a61399d@oracle.com> Message-ID: <3f46b828-d7f7-eb5e-d2bc-e3d10573f989@oracle.com> Having a longer period of inactivity before warning about a Draft PR being closed seems like a good idea to me, too. If this is implemented, I might suggest applying the same logic to any PR that hasn't yet been put out for review, so that PRs waiting for and OCA to be processed also wouldn't be closed as early. -- Kevin On 11/23/2020 3:38 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: > Hi, > > I just got a notification from a Skara bot that a PR I was subscribed > to was about to be closed due to inactivity. However, the PR in > question was a draft PR. > > This felt wrong. To me, a draft PR is a work-in-progress, where you > can check up your results with the Skara bots, and fellow developers. > As such, it might be avoid of activity for quite some time but still > not be considered dead. > > I understand that there is a need to purge out abandonded PRs, but > maybe the time limit could be greatly increased for draft PRs? > > /Magnus From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 24 11:31:38 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 11:31:38 GMT Subject: RFR: 819: Backports created by Robo Duke inherit all labels of original Message-ID: Instead of using the custom JBS endpoint for creating backport issues, simply create them directly. Retain the same fields that "hgupdater" does. ------------- Commit messages: - Initial version Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/961/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=961&range=00 Issue: https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-819 Stats: 242 lines in 7 files changed: 31 ins; 203 del; 8 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/961.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/961/head:pull/961 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/961 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 24 15:57:48 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:57:48 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <6wSYX5NLw30sSIQi3Us7LZQb0IuFqXiFDHwMsQLykr4=.830ca08d-0e7d-4b5f-9b91-822a212b87f2@github.com> On Mon, 23 Nov 2020 10:58:10 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Hi! >> Kindly review the patch to allow manual execution of jcheck. I think it might be worthwhile to restrict this command to some specific people but I am not sure who that should be (maybe restricting to the author is enough but a reviewer might want to execute it as well in case its urgent). >> >> I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. >> Thanks. >> Regards, >> Kartik > >> I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. > > Yeah, sorry about that, it has not really been a priority as no-one else actually run them in "production". It can be a bit complicated to configure them properly for running stand-alone, but if you want to run a test against GitHub instead of the mock implementation that's a bit easier. If you want to try that I'll be happy to assist with the required configuration. @rwestberg Yes, please. I plan to keep contributing in the future and having such a setup will help me to explore and understand the code much more quickly and in a better way. Hence, I think setting it up will be worth it. Thanks again for the help. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Tue Nov 24 16:10:52 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:10:52 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: <6wSYX5NLw30sSIQi3Us7LZQb0IuFqXiFDHwMsQLykr4=.830ca08d-0e7d-4b5f-9b91-822a212b87f2@github.com> References: <6wSYX5NLw30sSIQi3Us7LZQb0IuFqXiFDHwMsQLykr4=.830ca08d-0e7d-4b5f-9b91-822a212b87f2@github.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 15:55:40 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: >>> I wanted to test this locally by setting up the skara bots on my own repository but was unable to figure out how to do so due to lack of documentation. >> >> Yeah, sorry about that, it has not really been a priority as no-one else actually run them in "production". It can be a bit complicated to configure them properly for running stand-alone, but if you want to run a test against GitHub instead of the mock implementation that's a bit easier. If you want to try that I'll be happy to assist with the required configuration. > > @rwestberg Yes, please. I plan to keep contributing in the future and having such a setup will help me to explore and understand the code much more quickly and in a better way. Hence, I think setting it up will be worth it. Thanks again for the help. Sure, let's start with the required setup for running tests against GitHub (or GitLab) then! You can pass `-Pcredentials=/path/to/credentials.json` where the file contains something like this: { "type": "github", "host": "https://github.com", "project": "rwestberg/skara-integration", "namespace": "github.com", "apps": [ { "key": "certificates/sbot.private-key.pkcs8.pem", "id": "12837", "installation": "195957" }, { "key": "certificates/sbot2.private-key.pkcs8.pem", "id": "18848", "installation": "379295" }, { "key": "certificates/sbot3.private-key.pkcs8.pem", "id": "19394", "installation": "397926" } ] } Most tests require two or three different accounts in order to simulate various interactions, so that's why there are a list of them. Each account credential corresponds to a GitHub app that you can create on your account. The `id` can be seen after creating the app, the `installation` value can be found after the app is installed on your account. Finally, the key is the private key you associate with the GitHub app. The path is relative to the .json file. Note that it has to be in PEM format, you'll have to convert the file you get from GitHub. ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 25 12:28:27 2020 From: github.com+27751938+amcap1712 at openjdk.java.net (Kartik Ohri) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:28:27 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: References: <6wSYX5NLw30sSIQi3Us7LZQb0IuFqXiFDHwMsQLykr4=.830ca08d-0e7d-4b5f-9b91-822a212b87f2@github.com> Message-ID: <3b6G-yiGE57d1f9jOL6IDqOrkGm9YM_GGSaLWD9HVbc=.ad83e9f5-b6f8-4498-a578-1c9df6fe0e0e@github.com> On Tue, 24 Nov 2020 16:08:44 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> @rwestberg Yes, please. I plan to keep contributing in the future and having such a setup will help me to explore and understand the code much more quickly and in a better way. Hence, I think setting it up will be worth it. Thanks again for the help. > > Sure, let's start with the required setup for running tests against GitHub (or GitLab) then! You can pass `-Pcredentials=/path/to/credentials.json` where the file contains something like this: > > { > "type": "github", > "host": "https://github.com", > "project": "rwestberg/skara-integration", > "namespace": "github.com", > "apps": [ > { > "key": "certificates/sbot.private-key.pkcs8.pem", > "id": "12837", > "installation": "195957" > }, > { > "key": "certificates/sbot2.private-key.pkcs8.pem", > "id": "18848", > "installation": "379295" > }, > { > "key": "certificates/sbot3.private-key.pkcs8.pem", > "id": "19394", > "installation": "397926" > } > ] > } > > Most tests require two or three different accounts in order to simulate various interactions, so that's why there are a list of them. Each account credential corresponds to a GitHub app that you can create on your account. The `id` can be seen after creating the app, the `installation` value can be found after the app is installed on your account. Finally, the key is the private key you associate with the GitHub app. The path is relative to the .json file. Note that it has to be in PEM format, you'll have to convert the file you get from GitHub. I have created the 3 Github Apps and generated the .json file as you instructed. How should I proceed ? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 25 13:08:57 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 13:08:57 GMT Subject: RFR: SKARA-758: Add /check pull request command In-Reply-To: <3b6G-yiGE57d1f9jOL6IDqOrkGm9YM_GGSaLWD9HVbc=.ad83e9f5-b6f8-4498-a578-1c9df6fe0e0e@github.com> References: <6wSYX5NLw30sSIQi3Us7LZQb0IuFqXiFDHwMsQLykr4=.830ca08d-0e7d-4b5f-9b91-822a212b87f2@github.com> <3b6G-yiGE57d1f9jOL6IDqOrkGm9YM_GGSaLWD9HVbc=.ad83e9f5-b6f8-4498-a578-1c9df6fe0e0e@github.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 25 Nov 2020 12:26:18 GMT, Kartik Ohri wrote: >> Sure, let's start with the required setup for running tests against GitHub (or GitLab) then! You can pass `-Pcredentials=/path/to/credentials.json` where the file contains something like this: >> >> { >> "type": "github", >> "host": "https://github.com", >> "project": "rwestberg/skara-integration", >> "namespace": "github.com", >> "apps": [ >> { >> "key": "certificates/sbot.private-key.pkcs8.pem", >> "id": "12837", >> "installation": "195957" >> }, >> { >> "key": "certificates/sbot2.private-key.pkcs8.pem", >> "id": "18848", >> "installation": "379295" >> }, >> { >> "key": "certificates/sbot3.private-key.pkcs8.pem", >> "id": "19394", >> "installation": "397926" >> } >> ] >> } >> >> Most tests require two or three different accounts in order to simulate various interactions, so that's why there are a list of them. Each account credential corresponds to a GitHub app that you can create on your account. The `id` can be seen after creating the app, the `installation` value can be found after the app is installed on your account. Finally, the key is the private key you associate with the GitHub app. The path is relative to the .json file. Note that it has to be in PEM format, you'll have to convert the file you get from GitHub. > > I have created the 3 Github Apps and generated the .json file as you instructed. How should I proceed ? Now you can use the credentials file when running the tests through Gradle, probably something like this (I usually run from IntelliJ): `sh gradlew --tests *testCheckRun* -Pcredentials=/path/to/credentials.json` ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/954 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Wed Nov 25 14:10:34 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Wed, 25 Nov 2020 14:10:34 GMT Subject: RFR: Move testing information from the PR body to checks Message-ID: <6T7nJYX8wCNqN4Z3Y5UEpEF3MluIJyceCvqfDbPPMr0=.7a9b26fd-4a9e-4f5f-b93c-8c0b74aa036a@github.com> When summarizing pre-submit test results for a PR, show the results as a number of checks instead of a table in the PR body. This makes them more similar to the source information, and avoids excessive PR body updates. ------------- Commit messages: - Initial implementation Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=962&range=00 Stats: 1098 lines in 14 files changed: 626 ins; 467 del; 5 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/962/head:pull/962 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962 From magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com Thu Nov 26 08:44:07 2020 From: magnus.ihse.bursie at oracle.com (Magnus Ihse Bursie) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 09:44:07 +0100 Subject: Auto closing of draft PRs..? In-Reply-To: <3f46b828-d7f7-eb5e-d2bc-e3d10573f989@oracle.com> References: <1440877b-e7a8-5fca-c31d-6def2a61399d@oracle.com> <3f46b828-d7f7-eb5e-d2bc-e3d10573f989@oracle.com> Message-ID: <436a4053-29e0-d105-8296-abad956e4ea2@oracle.com> On 2020-11-23 15:17, Kevin Rushforth wrote: > Having a longer period of inactivity before warning about a Draft PR > being closed seems like a good idea to me, too. If this is > implemented, I might suggest applying the same logic to any PR that > hasn't yet been put out for review, so that PRs waiting for and OCA to > be processed also wouldn't be closed as early. Good point. I opened https://bugs.openjdk.java.net/browse/SKARA-831. /Magnus > > -- Kevin > > > On 11/23/2020 3:38 AM, Magnus Ihse Bursie wrote: >> Hi, >> >> I just got a notification from a Skara bot that a PR I was subscribed >> to was about to be closed due to inactivity. However, the PR in >> question was a draft PR. >> >> This felt wrong. To me, a draft PR is a work-in-progress, where you >> can check up your results with the Skara bots, and fellow developers. >> As such, it might be avoid of activity for quite some time but still >> not be considered dead. >> >> I understand that there is a need to purge out abandonded PRs, but >> maybe the time limit could be greatly increased for draft PRs? >> >> /Magnus > From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 26 16:14:25 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:14:25 GMT Subject: RFR: Move testing information from the PR body to checks [v2] In-Reply-To: <6T7nJYX8wCNqN4Z3Y5UEpEF3MluIJyceCvqfDbPPMr0=.7a9b26fd-4a9e-4f5f-b93c-8c0b74aa036a@github.com> References: <6T7nJYX8wCNqN4Z3Y5UEpEF3MluIJyceCvqfDbPPMr0=.7a9b26fd-4a9e-4f5f-b93c-8c0b74aa036a@github.com> Message-ID: > When summarizing pre-submit test results for a PR, show the results as a number of checks instead of a table in the PR body. This makes them more similar to the source information, and avoids excessive PR body updates. Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Only create summarized checks and put the individual job details in the check summary ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962/files/c1133a05..39cf8c41 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=962&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=962&range=00-01 Stats: 145 lines in 3 files changed: 77 ins; 15 del; 53 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/962/head:pull/962 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962 From jvernee at openjdk.java.net Thu Nov 26 20:02:31 2020 From: jvernee at openjdk.java.net (Jorn Vernee) Date: Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:02:31 GMT Subject: RFR: Add newline after closed issue warning Message-ID: Adds a missing newline after the 'issue is not open' warning, which is currently missing, and leads to the list not being formatted correctly. See e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1444 ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5962029/100388139-12f8ff80-302a-11eb-876a-25943c7d75d8.png) Any testing needed for this? ------------- Commit messages: - Add newline after closed issue warning Changes: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963/files Webrev: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=963&range=00 Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 0 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/963/head:pull/963 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From david.holmes at oracle.com Thu Nov 26 22:54:14 2020 From: david.holmes at oracle.com (David Holmes) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:54:14 +1000 Subject: How to avoid git push --force to a pull request(PR)? In-Reply-To: <1606337460402.57835@amazon.com> References: <1606269567937.41228@amazon.com> <1606337460402.57835@amazon.com> Message-ID: On 26/11/2020 6:51 am, Liu, Xin wrote: > cc hotspot-dev. > I found that skara-dev is mainly for skara developers. my question is for general hotspot developers. > > thanks, > --lx > > > ________________________________________ > From: Liu, Xin > Sent: Tuesday, November 24, 2020 5:59 PM > To: skara-dev at openjdk.java.net > Cc: Tobias Hartmann > Subject: How to avoid git push --force to a pull request(PR)? > > Hi, Skara developers, > > > Tobias suggested not to use force push here > https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1073#issuecomment-726549523 Right. There is generally no need for "force push" on an active PR because you can just merge and do a normal push. The skara tooling will flatten the set of commits into one single clean commit when you integrate, so none of the merges are evident. > Sometimes, I use git push --force to a private branch, which maps to an ongoing PR. > What I do is to update my branch to TIP, rebase my changes to it and then "git push --force" to my branch remotely. Skara remarks the PR ?force pushed ? eg. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1179 > > > Yes, I admit that it would ruin the "incremental webrev". I do it for the following two reasons. > 1) the reviewing process lasts too long. I have to update the base of my private branch, or it isn't mergeable. Not sure what you mean by the "base" of your "private branch. You should have a personal fork on Github. You clone your personal fork locally and create as many branches as you like, merging as you desire, and push them to your PF when you need to create a PR. You can update your local master to branch with upstream any time you like without affecting your working branches. If you need to update a working branch then just merge with master and push to your PF. Cheers, David ----- > Other developers may have changed the common code when you are working on your PRs, right? /integrate will fail because of conflicts. > > 2) I have to update the base because of testing. > Openjdk now contains the sanity check workflow. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/blob/master/.github/workflows/submit.yml > I'd like to pass them all before integrating. Sometimes, I run into failures but my PR is not the culprit. The build breakage and regression are usually rapidly fixed in the master branch. > > I understand I can always ditch the old PR and start over, but all comments in the old PR will lose in this way. On the side, I also feel guilty to use force push frequently. > May I know if Skara has other option to help me out? > > > I read this blog (https://julien.danjou.info/rant-about-github-pull-request-workflow-implementation/), it declares the dilemma comes from github PR mechanism. > but that blog was 7-year-old, I am not sure that if github has sorted it out or not. Even github hasn't, is that possible to be solved by Skara? > > thanks, > --lx > > > > > From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 08:19:22 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:19:22 GMT Subject: RFR: Add newline after closed issue warning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 19:59:49 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote: > Adds a missing newline after the 'issue is not open' warning, which is currently missing, and leads to the list not being formatted correctly. See e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1444 > > ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5962029/100388139-12f8ff80-302a-11eb-876a-25943c7d75d8.png) > > Any testing needed for this? Looks good, I guess a test would be nice, but since there isn't one at the moment there's no need to remedy that right now unless you really want to. bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 487: > 485: progressBody.append(" ?? Issue is not open.\n"); > 486: } > 487: continue; I know I wrote this, but another solution would be to drop the `continue` here, I don't remember why it's there. :) ------------- Marked as reviewed by rwestberg (Reviewer). PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From jvernee at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 11:00:47 2020 From: jvernee at openjdk.java.net (Jorn Vernee) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 11:00:47 GMT Subject: RFR: Add newline after closed issue warning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 08:14:41 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> Adds a missing newline after the 'issue is not open' warning, which is currently missing, and leads to the list not being formatted correctly. See e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1444 >> >> ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5962029/100388139-12f8ff80-302a-11eb-876a-25943c7d75d8.png) >> >> Any testing needed for this? > > bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 487: > >> 485: progressBody.append(" ?? Issue is not open.\n"); >> 486: } >> 487: continue; > > I know I wrote this, but another solution would be to drop the `continue` here, I don't remember why it's there. :) Ok, will do that than. (seems a little cleaner to me). I think that will only change whether the `if` below is evaluated. Maybe you wanted only one warning to be printed at a time? ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From jvernee at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 12:01:02 2020 From: jvernee at openjdk.java.net (Jorn Vernee) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 12:01:02 GMT Subject: RFR: Add newline after closed issue warning [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: > Adds a missing newline after the 'issue is not open' warning, which is currently missing, and leads to the list not being formatted correctly. See e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1444 > > ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5962029/100388139-12f8ff80-302a-11eb-876a-25943c7d75d8.png) > > Any testing needed for this? Jorn Vernee has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: Drop continue instead. ------------- Changes: - all: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963/files - new: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963/files/00e70cda..b8a6be42 Webrevs: - full: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=963&range=01 - incr: https://webrevs.openjdk.java.net/?repo=skara&pr=963&range=00-01 Stats: 2 lines in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 1 mod Patch: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963.diff Fetch: git fetch https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara pull/963/head:pull/963 PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From rwestberg at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 12:05:26 2020 From: rwestberg at openjdk.java.net (Robin Westberg) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 12:05:26 GMT Subject: RFR: Add newline after closed issue warning [v2] In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, 27 Nov 2020 10:58:36 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote: >> bots/pr/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/pr/CheckRun.java line 487: >> >>> 485: progressBody.append(" ?? Issue is not open.\n"); >>> 486: } >>> 487: continue; >> >> I know I wrote this, but another solution would be to drop the `continue` here, I don't remember why it's there. :) > > Ok, will do that than. (seems a little cleaner to me). I think that will only change whether the `if` below is evaluated. Maybe you wanted only one warning to be printed at a time? Yeah I guess, but then it was a bit inconsistent with the rest of the warnings anyway... So this looks good to me! ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From jvernee at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 12:19:05 2020 From: jvernee at openjdk.java.net (Jorn Vernee) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 12:19:05 GMT Subject: Integrated: Add newline after closed issue warning In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 19:59:49 GMT, Jorn Vernee wrote: > Adds a missing newline after the 'issue is not open' warning, which is currently missing, and leads to the list not being formatted correctly. See e.g. https://github.com/openjdk/jdk/pull/1444 > > ![image](https://user-images.githubusercontent.com/5962029/100388139-12f8ff80-302a-11eb-876a-25943c7d75d8.png) > > Any testing needed for this? This pull request has now been integrated. Changeset: a99a226f Author: Jorn Vernee URL: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/commit/a99a226f Stats: 1 line in 1 file changed: 0 ins; 1 del; 0 mod Add newline after closed issue warning Reviewed-by: rwestberg ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/963 From jvernee at openjdk.java.net Fri Nov 27 17:04:03 2020 From: jvernee at openjdk.java.net (Jorn Vernee) Date: Fri, 27 Nov 2020 17:04:03 GMT Subject: RFR: Move testing information from the PR body to checks [v2] In-Reply-To: References: <6T7nJYX8wCNqN4Z3Y5UEpEF3MluIJyceCvqfDbPPMr0=.7a9b26fd-4a9e-4f5f-b93c-8c0b74aa036a@github.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 26 Nov 2020 16:14:25 GMT, Robin Westberg wrote: >> When summarizing pre-submit test results for a PR, show the results as a number of checks instead of a table in the PR body. This makes them more similar to the source information, and avoids excessive PR body updates. > > Robin Westberg has updated the pull request incrementally with one additional commit since the last revision: > > Only create summarized checks and put the individual job details in the check summary Marked as reviewed by jvernee (Reviewer). bots/testinfo/src/main/java/org/openjdk/skara/bots/testinfo/TestInfoBot.java line 37: > 35: private final Map expirations = new HashMap<>(); > 36: > 37: private static final Logger log = Logger.getLogger("org.openjdk.skara.bots");; Nit: double semi-colon Suggestion: private static final Logger log = Logger.getLogger("org.openjdk.skara.bots"); ------------- PR: https://git.openjdk.java.net/skara/pull/962