MR does not merge
Simon Peyton Jones
simonpj at microsoft.com
Thu Jan 17 12:41:42 UTC 2019
To me it seems clear that GUARANTEEING that a patch won't break the master branch is difficult; it serialises all patches, and it may require many iterations.
Here's an obvious alternative for the "merge to master" pipeline;
1. Rebase the MR on master. If that fails, send email to the author.
2. Full validate. If that fails, send email to the author.
3. Rebase on master again (if master has changed). If that fails,
send email to author
4. Commit to master
* There is a small possibility that changes between starting (2) and
finishing (3) will meant that, even though (3) succeeds cleanly, there
is a semantic bug that means that the result fails.
But it is extremely unlikely. And if it does happen, all subsequent
builds will fail, so we'll soon know. Belt-and-braces: you could validate
the result of (4) so that blame is always correctly attributed.
* The process is highly parallel. You can be validating multiple patches
at the same time, in stark contrast to the completely serial nature of
our current story.
Can Gitlab do this?
| -----Original Message-----
| From: Evan Laforge <qdunkan at gmail.com>
| Sent: 16 January 2019 15:20
| To: Matthew Pickering <matthewtpickering at gmail.com>
| Cc: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>; ghc-devs at haskell.org
| Subject: Re: MR does not merge
| At work we use "marge bot",
| which is an automatic bot that will do the rebase and resubmit thing.
| I think it's pretty essential, because otherwise any intervening merge
| means you have to babysit the merge button. It's also more efficient if
| you have expensive CI, because it serializes the runs.
| BTW, I've extended marge with a "try rebase, then try merge" strategy,
| which is useful if people merge from head, and a "merge CI run" which is
| useful if you have an expensive CI you want to run only on merge, not on
| every single branch push.
| On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 10:56 PM Matthew Pickering
| <matthewtpickering at gmail.com> wrote:
| > There is problem with the interaction between "merge when validated"
| > and "fast forward merge only" option.
| > If anyone commits to master between clicking the button and validation
| > finishing then the merge will fail as the patch needs to be rebased
| > before it can be merged.
| > I'm not sure what the plan to deal with this is.
| > On Wed, Jan 16, 2019 at 2:49 PM Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs
| > <ghc-devs at haskell.org> wrote:
| > >
| > > Ben
| > >
| > > Six days ago I submitted this MR
| > >
| > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgi
| > > tlab.haskell.org%2Fghc%2Fghc%2Fmerge_requests%2F109&data=02%7C01
| > > %7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cb0a1fe00d27e4879ae1e08d67bc614f2%7C72f9
| > > 88bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636832488027160974&sdata=
| > > OjHtPXsIpjeW7tPJvheT%2F4hh4aOW7h82bdcifdQ6cfA%3D&reserved=0
| > >
| > > Just tiny refactorings. I said “merge when validated”
| > >
| > > But six days later, it still appears not to have merged. What’s up?
| I was expecting it to merge in a matter of an hour or two.
| > >
| > > Thanks
| > >
| > > Simon
| > >
| > > _______________________________________________
| > > ghc-devs mailing list
| > > ghc-devs at haskell.org
| > > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmai
| > > l.haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-devs&data=02%
| > > 7C01%7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cb0a1fe00d27e4879ae1e08d67bc614f2%7C
| > > 72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636832488027160974&sd
| > > ata=AxazRR%2FEUVEB93FYHAaLig%2FYPBR%2BLH9eAciYs5NTaNU%3D&reserve
| > > d=0
| > _______________________________________________
| > ghc-devs mailing list
| > ghc-devs at haskell.org
| > https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmail.
| > haskell.org%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fghc-devs&data=02%7C01
| > %7Csimonpj%40microsoft.com%7Cb0a1fe00d27e4879ae1e08d67bc614f2%7C72f988
| > bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C636832488027160974&sdata=Axaz
| > RR%2FEUVEB93FYHAaLig%2FYPBR%2BLH9eAciYs5NTaNU%3D&reserved=0
More information about the ghc-devs