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

Attach retry instructions to release automation build as a markdown doc #51

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Jul 6, 2022

Conversation

dagood
Copy link
Member

@dagood dagood commented Jul 5, 2022

Upload a doc describing how to retry to the AzDO build as a "summary" of the build. This makes AzDO display the subset-of-markdown document its own tab on the build summary screen, which is a lot easier to get to than digging into the logs of a specific build step to find the instructions. This is also an opportunity to filter out unnecessary instructions.

Update release docs to match.

Include a direct link to the page showing the retry doc in status update release issue comments.

Fix an inconsistent "." in the Report Failure step vs. the Report Success step.


The doc looks like this in the build:

image

And the comment on the release issue looks like this:

1857900: 🚨 Failed to run microsoft/go build prep steps for 1.18.3-1.
Click here to see 1857900 retry instructions.

Changes to the repo-side instructions doc are here: https://github.com/dagood/go-infra/blob/dev/dagood/retry-doc/docs/release-process/instructions.md#retrying

Upload a doc describing how to retry to the AzDO build as a "summary" of the build. This makes AzDO display the subset-of-markdown document its own tab on the build summary screen, which is a lot easier to get to than digging into the logs of a specific build step to find the instructions. This is also an opportunity to filter out unnecessary instructions.

Update release docs to match.

Include a direct link to the page showing the retry doc in status update release issue comments.

Fix an inconsistent "." in the Report Failure step vs. the Report Success step.
@dagood dagood requested a review from a team as a code owner July 5, 2022 17:38
azdo/azdo.go Outdated
// UploadBuildSummary uses an AzDO logging command to upload a build summary. When used on a
// markdown file, the rendered document shows up on the build page in an "Extensions" tab. The path
// must be a full path.
func UploadBuildSummary(path string) {
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is more generic than build, can be used to upload anything. Consider naming UploadSummary

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm, what I originally had in mind for the name was that it's just specifying "AzDO build" for a little clarify at the point where the func is used. Similar to GetBuildWebURL. (But upload a build summary in the comment ruins that.)

For task.setvariable I had the same thing in mind, but I called it SetPipelineVariable(name, value string). Not consistent vs. Build.

Maybe it'd get the point across better to make it explicit and stick more closely to the task.setvariable/task.uploadsummary names: LogCmdSetVariable, LogCmdUploadSummary. It would also make it easier to recognize that this isn't a network call. (The lack of ctx context.Context and return value seems odd if you think it's a network call.) I'm doing this rename.

@dagood dagood changed the base branch from dev/dagood/combine-rel-pipelines to main July 6, 2022 17:01
Rename AzDO logging command funcs to use LogCmd prefix and follow the AzDO command naming more closely. Update comments: improve descriptions and link to the new logging command doc page rather than the old one.
@dagood dagood merged commit 89299e0 into microsoft:main Jul 6, 2022
@dagood dagood deleted the dev/dagood/retry-doc branch July 6, 2022 19:26
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
3 participants