Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[JENKINS-32821] Regexp for children should be applied even without "Rerun build only for failed parts on the matrix" #30

Closed

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@ikedam
Copy link
Member

commented Feb 20, 2016

JENKINS-32821

  • "Rerun build only for failed parts on the matrix" is unchecked.
  • "Regular expression to search for" is checked.
  • "Test regular expression for the matrix parent" is unchecked.

In this case, regexp is not tested at all.

I'll fix this issue in following steps:

  1. Add a test to reproduce JENKINS-32821 (as described in #27)
  2. Fix the code to have the regexp is applied for the children even when "Rerun build only for failed parts on the matrix" is unchecked, and see the test added in 1 pass.
@ikedam

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Feb 20, 2016

The test failed, of course.
The build was rescheduled even though the regular expression shouldn't have matched any children.
https://jenkins.ci.cloudbees.com/job/plugins/job/naginator-plugin/org.jenkins-ci.plugins$naginator/106/testReport/junit/com.chikli.hudson.plugin.naginator/NaginatorPublisherTest/testRegexpForMatrixChildWithoutMatrixPart/

I'll push a fixing commit.

@ikedam

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Feb 20, 2016

@mjainta
Would you review this change?
I believe this change fixes the problem you described in #27.

@jenkinsadmin

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Feb 20, 2016

Thank you for this pull request! Please check this document for how the Jenkins project handles pull requests.

@mjainta

This comment has been minimized.

A pleasure to see that regex used 👍

edit: reviewed it, looks good to me :)

@ikedam

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Feb 27, 2016

Replaced with #29.

@ikedam ikedam closed this Feb 27, 2016

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.