CiBoT strangeness

CiBoT strangeness

by Michael Aherne -
Number of replies: 9
Picture of Core developers Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers

The CiBoT has posted a comment on an issue I've been working on (MDL-26680) saying "Remote branch MDL-26680-master to be integrated into upstream master", which seems odd to me because the patch was removed from integration last month. I've since made some more changes and the issue is waiting for peer review.

Can someone who knows about CiBoT comment on whether this is expected behaviour, or if something has gone wrong? I can't find much documentation on the bot's part in the Moodle CI process to help me work this out myself!

Average of ratings: -
In reply to Michael Aherne

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Tim Hunt -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Particularly helpful Moodlers Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers

CiBoT is something that Eloy Lafuente has been working on. It runs some of the same tests that http://integration.moodle.org/ does on your code before it is integrated, and then attaches a report to the tracker issue.

It is still being developed/tested, and what you saw was a bit of testing.

It does make sense to do the automated tests on things waiting for peer review. If there are problems tha the automated tests will detect, then you may as well fix all those before a human looks at it.

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Tim Hunt

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Michael Aherne -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers

Thanks, Tim, that explains a lot. I'd better go and rebase my patch, which is what it was actually complaining about!

In reply to Michael Aherne

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Eloy Lafuente (stronk7) -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers

Hi,

just adding some background information about the CiBoT and its checks...

Since long ago, we have a "manual" checker that, under demand, was able to perform some basic checks (mergeability, codechecker reporting filtering results by changed lines, phpdocs...). And we (the integration team) have been using it manually as a helper tool in the integration process.

But it was clear since time ago (MDLSITE-2287) that the same tool could be really useful not only for integrators, but also to developers and peer-reviewers, so we have been thinking about to automate it under various situations, namely:

  • when a developer requests it by adding the "cime" label to the issue (this is already automated, feel free to try it, should work).
  • when an issue goes to "waiting peer review" status (not automated yet, just deciding about its schedule).
  • when an issue goes to "waiting for integration" status for us, integrators, to have a fresh report (not automated yet, just deciding about its schedule).

All those executions are run from the "Tracker - CI - Bulk precheck issues" job in the CI servers and we have just performed some public runs of them lately (note there is a setting in the jobs to make executions quiet, we just moved to "verbose" mode recently).

Before running those new "verbose" executions I did add a comment warning about the incoming CiBoT report. I just did not add that explanatory comment for the last manual run and that's the one pre-checking MDL-26680 (and another 35 issues).

Basically, we are performing some runs here and there, and any feedback, comments, problem, subtasks... should go to MDLSITE-2662 where we are aiming to polish the bulk pre-checker as much as possible before  making it public (although I suppose it's already public LOL).

In any case, be warned it:

  • Is still experimental (wip).
  • Is still incomplete (there are tons of checks to add to it).
  • It can show some false positives here and there (we need to tidy/conform some of the checks to be more accurate).

And, as said, all that is happening @ MDLSITE-2662, feel free to comment there. For example I jut have created a subtask of it (MDLSITE-2689), aiming to clarify a bit the comments added by the bot(s).

And that's the story and the history of the CiBoT pre-checker and how we want it to become a good tool for everybody. Let's see how it evolves.

Hope this helps, ciao smile

Average of ratings: Useful (5)
In reply to Eloy Lafuente (stronk7)

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Justin Filip -

Eloy, how quickly after the cime label is added will the bot run through it's tests on an issue? Is that an overnight (relative to some specific TZ) operation or is JIRA being polled regularly for issues with that label and adding them to a testing queue?

Thanks for this, BTW, it's a big help for getting attention on issues that us non-HQ folks consider ready to go.

In reply to Justin Filip

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Eloy Lafuente (stronk7) -
Picture of Core developers Picture of Documentation writers Picture of Moodle HQ Picture of Peer reviewers Picture of Plugin developers Picture of Testers

Hi Justin,

right now the "Developer request" (aka "cime" label) precheck is scheduled to run every 30 mins.

But, if the CI servers are busy running other jobs... they are queued and can take longer.

Ciao smile

Average of ratings: Useful (1)
In reply to Eloy Lafuente (stronk7)

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Dave Balch -

Hi Eloy,

Thanks for CiBoT - it looks like it could really help developers get used to the Moodle process, and speed up the development flow. I found it very helpful to be shown that I was putting my git branch details in wrong smile

I just wanted to check: Do CiBoT's prechecker results not have any details (e.g. the checks on https://tracker.moodle.org/browse/MDL-40479?focusedCommentId=299219&#comment-299219) just because it's work in progress - i.e. it's not that something has broken?

Cheers,
Dave.

In reply to Dave Balch

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Dan Poltawski -

Hi Dave,

We are aware the message is a bit terse at the moment - see issue MDLSITE-2689 where we are looking to improve it.

In reply to Dan Poltawski

Re: CiBoT strangeness

by Dave Balch -

Cool, thanks.

In fact, it looks like CiBoT has just been updated with some improvements smile