Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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
DEVPROD-6266 Fix duplication for --repeat-patch #7892
DEVPROD-6266 Fix duplication for --repeat-patch #7892
Changes from 1 commit
5339148
611bb4e
0836d09
0f1410c
e4ed569
cc76faf
dae6a50
15b7658
1ea5ff7
9e1ab61
bb8910b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this error message doesn't seem right
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
could we change "needed" language to dependency language? This is more consistent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It needs both dependencies and tasks from single host task groups
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Ah. Perhaps "addDependenciesAndTaskGroups" then? I think right now the function includes details that really aren't relevant to the usage (that only failed tasks are passed in, and that its called by the reuse function).
Also, should we change the error message to say "dependencies and task groups"
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It looks like the first half of this message got missed -- I'd still suggest changing the function title and variables to be more specific about what's being done rather than why its being called.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
so strange, I did the change but it was somehow lost. My apologies, pushed it now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is this if statement necessary since filteredTasks = allFailedPlusNeededTasks at 691?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Why do we need the variant/task display name parts of the query at all? Can't we just get all activated tasks? It's not clear to me what we'd be filtering out by including this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
If this is the end of the sentence, can you add a . ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
can includeDependencies be used here instead, if we just convert the failedTasks to tv pairs?
(Also, i think this function can be private)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I made it private. It also adds all tasks in a single host task group, so includeDependencies would only cover part of it.