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

Toggling skip_resolution affects package state #151

Open
mizdebsk opened this issue Apr 28, 2017 · 3 comments
Open

Toggling skip_resolution affects package state #151

mizdebsk opened this issue Apr 28, 2017 · 3 comments
Assignees

Comments

@mizdebsk
Copy link
Member

As expected, setting skip_resolution=True in web UI for unresolved package makes it resolved and sets status different from unresolved (eg. ok, failing etc.) But then resetting skip_resolution back to False doesn't change state back to unresolved.

@mizdebsk mizdebsk added the bug label Apr 28, 2017
@msimacek
Copy link
Contributor

Because at that point (you may toggle it back after a year) the resolution state is not known until an attempt to resolve the package is made (on next resolver run). Setting it to unresolved would not be a correct thing to do, as it would be just making stuff up (likely, it won't be unresolved anymore).

What we could do, however, is changing how not resolved (!= unresolved) packages are shown - if the package has resolved = null (which happens after the package was just added or skip_resolution was toggled back), show the status as "unknown" until it's resolved.

@msimacek msimacek removed the bug label Apr 28, 2017
@mizdebsk
Copy link
Member Author

Because at that point (you may toggle it back after a year) the resolution state is not known until an attempt to resolve the package is made (on next resolver run). Setting it to unresolved would not be a correct thing to do, as it would be just making stuff up (likely, it won't be unresolved anymore).

Likewise, setting build to OK is not correct either, as last successful build may be one year old.

@msimacek
Copy link
Contributor

Likewise, setting build to OK is not correct either, as last successful build may be one year old.

That's why I suggested showing it as unknown.

@mizdebsk mizdebsk self-assigned this May 5, 2017
mizdebsk added a commit that referenced this issue May 5, 2017
Packages which dependencies must be resolved (skip_resolution is
False), but were not yet resolved should have state "unknown".

Closes #151
mizdebsk added a commit that referenced this issue May 5, 2017
Packages which dependencies must be resolved (skip_resolution is
False), but were not yet resolved should have state "unknown".

Closes #151
mizdebsk added a commit that referenced this issue May 10, 2017
Packages which dependencies must be resolved (skip_resolution is
False), but were not yet resolved should have state "unknown".

Closes #151
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants