Hi Nikolay, What about the case when committer creates ignite-9679 branch and tests it without PR?
We have 1100+ open PRs and less than 100 open tickets. So scanning seems to be possible only in JIRA. Mention probably will work for GitHub, but it needs to be researched. Two open PRs is not a valid situation in the majority of cases and How To Contribute asks to avoid it. The bot can ignore closed PRs and the bot can expect there is only one open PR per ticket. Sincerely, Dmitriy Pavlov пн, 24 сент. 2018 г. в 23:41, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > Hello, Dmitriy. > > > But it could be a lot of work to handle mentions (probably from the > email> account and inbox). > > Actually, it can be done via GitHub REST API [1]. > It has 'since' param, so getting new GitHub comments is a very basic task. > > > Patch available ticket > > I think we shouldn't take a ticket as an entity that should be tested. > For me, it's a PR. > > Moreover, it's a common case when we have several PR in a ticket. > And it's a common case when both of them has to be tested. > > My vote goes to the closer integration with GitHub. > > [1] > https://developer.github.com/v3/pulls/comments/#list-comments-in-a-repository > > В Пн, 24/09/2018 в 22:36 +0300, Dmitriy Pavlov пишет: > > Hi Nikolay, > > > > The idea makes perfect sense for me, and we should definitely take the > best > > practices from other big Apache projects. > > > > But it could be a lot of work to handle mentions (probably from the email > > account and inbox). > > > > I would like to suggest the following algorithm: > > > > Patch available ticket, which was never checked by the bot will be > > processed in the following steps: > > 1. check existing run all (by PR or by branch name), if found go to the > > step 3 > > 2. run-all to be triggered by PR > > 3. results should be analyzed for the presence of possible blockers. If > > there is no blockers go to step 5. > > 4. re-run of particular suites containing possible blockers should be > > applied to try to get success for very rare flaky failures (<1%). Go to 3 > > (this go to should be done only once). > > 5. comment should be added to JIRA ticket containing information about > > results. > > > > If a ticket was processed by bot early (probably author added some fixes) > > but still in PA state, the bot will check comments list and find possible > > new mentions (made after the previous build complete date). If it finds > > such comments it goes to step 1 (trying to find only new builds > available). > > > > What do you think? > > > > Sincerely, > > Dmitriy Pavlov > > > > пн, 24 сент. 2018 г. в 21:43, Nikolay Izhikov <nizhi...@apache.org>: > > > > > Hello, Igniters. > > > > > > I propose to implement following behaviour: > > > > > > 1. Execute "Run all" suite for specific PR when the author of PR makes > a > > > comment > > > "@mtcga.bot Run Tests!" in GitHub comments. > > > > > > 2. Send a comment with "Run All" results both: to a Jira ticket and > GitHub > > > comment. > > > > > > 3. Label PR based on "Run All" results like it done in Apache Kafka [1] > > > > > > I've create ticket for this proposal [2] > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > [1] https://github.com/apache/kafka/pulls > > > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-9678
