Page MenuHomePhabricator

backport is showing confusing prompt under certain conditions
Open, Stalled, Needs TriagePublic

Description

When backporting a configuration change that depends on a non-production change in a different repo, we prompt the user for confirmation. This behavior is incorrect when the dependency has already been merged, in which case the dependency should simply be ignored. The dependency being merged is not enough to ignore it -- even if merged there's still a chance that the code didn't make its way to production. A more clear, more informative message should be shown to the user instead so they can make a decision on whether to continue the backport.

A recently added warning message (the message was moved to a different location in code, but was already there) shown with the prompt surfaced the bug and confused a backporter: P58805

Details

TitleReferenceAuthorSource BranchDest Branch
backport.py: Restore included_in branches checkrepos/releng/scap!270jhuneidiT360291-2master
backport: use more informative message for configuration backportsrepos/releng/scap!250jnucheT360291master
Customize query in GitLab

Related Objects

Event Timeline

jnuche renamed this task from backport is incorrectly prompting confirmation for merged changes under certain conditions to backport is showing confusing prompt under certain conditions.Mar 18 2024, 1:11 PM
jnuche updated the task description. (Show Details)
thcipriani changed the task status from Open to Stalled.Apr 3 2024, 5:39 PM
thcipriani subscribed.

Stalling this one to reflect that the patch attached needs some rework and @jnuche isn't actively working on it at the moment.

Noting here that after analyzing the issue with @dancy and @jeena. there's a few extra situations in backport that we want to control. This will also include some more refactoring of existing code. I still need to create a task to document and track the necessary work for this.

In the meantime, this story can be used to change the code to generate a more meaningful message in the situation that prompted P58805, i.e. to make it clear to the user that the warning refers to a depedency, and not the root change specified by the user.