Maybe the issue is on the PreCommit-Admin job that is on builds.apache.org
Jenkins server. This is the one that walks through all JIRAs in searching
of patches to be tested.

The old Jenkins server used to have its own PreCommit-Admin, but we lost it
and we starting using the one from ASF.

I'm not sure how that job works exactly, but I can investigate.

On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 4:37 PM, Sergey Shelukhin <[email protected]>
wrote:

> I had a couple HiveQA reports posted to recently-resolved JIRAs today, all
> the builds having started after the JIRA has already been resolved. I
> wonder if there’s some additional issue where it picks up resolved JIRAs,
> or fails to ignore them when starting a run? IIRC the old jenkins didn’t
> do that.
>
> On 16/5/4, 13:25, "Hari Sivarama Subramaniyan"
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >Eugene, thanks for catching that. It looks like a bug with the jenkins, I
> >was cleaning up my jira queue yesterday night and unassigned myself from
> >a bunch of old jiras that I am no longer working on currently or the ones
> >which I was not sure if the issue still exists . Some of these jiras
> >which already had a patch got submitted for precommit runs since they had
> >a "Patch Available" state.  I have removed them from the precommit build
> >queue.
> >
> >Thanks
> >Hari
> >________________________________________
> >From: Pengcheng Xiong <[email protected]>
> >Sent: Wednesday, May 04, 2016 1:11 PM
> >To: [email protected]
> >Subject: Re: HiveQA jenkins picking up old tickets
> >
> >Hi Eugene,
> >
> >    I believe that Hari is working on that as there is update activity in
> >the jira 12hrs ago.
> >
> >Best
> >Pengcheng
> >
> >On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 1:03 PM, Eugene Koifman <[email protected]>
> >wrote:
> >
> >> Hi,
> >> it seems that the queue is full of tickets with 4 digit numbers.  I
> >> checked a few at random (e.g.
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-6867) - they haven't had any
> >> activity in a very long time.
> >>
> >> Is this intentional?
> >>
> >> thanks,
> >> Eugene
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
>
>

Reply via email to