Re: [BuildStream] Gitlab Merge Trains

[Laurence Urhegyi <laurence urhegyi codethink co uk>]

No I apologise that this wasn't made clearer from the start. For some 
context, we noticed that with the release of Gitlab 12.1 yesterday, a 
feature called Merge Trains became available [1], which is is exactly 
what marge-bot is for but is actually better as it can handle several 
MRs at the same time.

As it happens, we jumped the gun and sent this mail out too soon, with 
incorrect messaging. There are some difficulties that still need ironing 
out with merge trains.

All - please do not change your workflow yet. We'll fix this and update 
the list. Sincere apologies for the noise.

Laurence

[0] https://about.gitlab.com/2019/07/22/gitlab-12-1-released/
[1] 
https://about.gitlab.com/2019/07/22/gitlab-12-1-released/#parallel-execution-strategy-for-merge-trains



On 2019-07-23 17:07, Sander Striker wrote:
> Thanks for clarifying.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Sander
>
> On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 5:47 PM Laurence Urhegyi
> <laurence urhegyi codethink co uk> wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > It was me who used the term 'broad consensus on irc' - and I was
> > referring to those on irc at a specific time. I actually used it as
> > I
> > was encouraging Alexandru to bring this to the list specifically so
> > that
> > all contributors could see it, not just those on irc. So I think
> > everyone is on the same page here :)
> >
> > These changes are made in the right spirit, just as the marge-bot
> > changes that I introduced were also.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Laurence
> >
> > On 2019-07-23 16:27, Sander Striker via buildstream-list wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > I do not know what "a broad consensus on IRC" means.  Consensus
> > > between who?  I know for a fact that part of the community cannot
> > > easily be on IRC and therefor isn't.
> > >
> > > On the topic of Marge Bot and switching to a more general feature,
> > I
> > > think that is fine, with appropriate notice.  Maybe also with a
> > more
> > > catchy subject line like "Retiring Marge-Bot, Workflow Change".
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Sander
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 5:06 PM Alexandru Fazakas via
> > buildstream-list
> > > <buildstream-list gnome org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > Due to a broad consensus on IRC, with Gitlab's addition of Merge
> > > > Trains[1]
> > > > we are moving away from using Marge Bot. The changes to the code
> > > > base
> > > > itself are not massive. We're no longer running the usual tests
> > > > (e.g. everything
> > > > other than overnight ones) on master, as they would have already
> > > > been ran
> > > > on their branch previously.
> > > >
> > > > Regarding developer work flow: instead of assigning Marge Bot to
> > an
> > > > accepted
> > > > MR, we should just add the MR to a merge train (or start one
> > should
> > > > none be
> > > > already running), as explained in the documentation below.
> > > >
> > > > This change should make accepting and merging multiple MR's at
> > once
> > > > easier to do and manage with Gitlab's support.
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > > Alex
> > > >
> > > > [1] Gitlab merge trains [1]
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > buildstream-list mailing list
> > > > buildstream-list gnome org
> > > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/buildstream-list
> > >
> > >
> > > Links:
> > > ------
> > > [1]
> https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/ci/merge_request_pipelines/pipelines_for_merged_results/merge_trains/
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > buildstream-list mailing list
> > > buildstream-list gnome org
> > > https://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/buildstream-list