block PaC from remembering ok-to-test

[gabemontero]

Inspired by @Roming22 's redhat-appstudio/rhtap-installer#88 and a heads up from @arewm

rh-pre-commit.version: 2.2.0
rh-pre-commit.check-secrets: ENABLED

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: arewm, gabemontero

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• components/pipeline-service/OWNERS [arewm]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[gabemontero]

/hold

will validate on arch call, decide how to announce

[enarha]

Do we want to also enable that on (components/pipeline-service/staging/)stone-stage-p01 ? I'm OK if we do with the prod bump to not block this PR for longer.

[enarha]

... since the CI is green I'm also OK to update p01 and then force merge here. Either way is OK.

[gabemontero]

The script didn’t change p01 for whatever reason. It is a private cluster with no access outside of red hat so not under immediate threat. So I did not make manual updates.

…

On Fri, Mar 29, 2024 at 8:31 AM Emil Natan ***@***.***> wrote: ... since the CI is green I'm also OK to update p01 and then force merge here. Either way is OK. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3522 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AA3NU5DL6VELTXIJDBSS5ULY2VNLVAVCNFSM6AAAAABFNRK7C2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDAMRXGE4DEMZVG4> . You are receiving this because you authored the thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[enarha]

But we should eventually do for consistency.
/lgtm

[gabemontero]

But we should eventually do for consistency. /lgtm

minimally understand why the script did not update it; then, assuming the reason is not valid from our point of view, then adjust things so the script does update it

[gabemontero]

another multi platform get instance flake

but the latest retest has us green again

[gabemontero]

@savitaashture FYI

[gabemontero]

OK a bit of a status update. We are using this change and the associated reasons behind it to help initiate @savitaashture wrt providing tekton related support for Konkflux as part of decommissioning the pipeline service team and moving its responsibilities to different parts of the org, but with most of them landing now on the openshift pipelines team.

FYI - @savitaashture is one of the PAC developers, so is very familiar with this feature, and why we would want it.

Our next steps will be:

• @savitaashture is going to build a google doc so we can review the draft of the announcement that will be made in #konflux-users and the konflux mailing list of the plans to turn on this PAC feature and why, including providing any relevant/useful links as to why this feature was added (which in fact was at the behest of one of openshift pipelines biggest external customers. She will of course explain the usability implication of having to re-do the /ok-to-test if new commits get pushed to the PR
• FYI - I would not be surprised if PMs etc. come back that we have to do more than "just announce" to make this change in user behavior .... we'll see. An interesting litmus test if you will.
• If there is no pushback, given the approval from the arch board, I'll remove the hold here and merge.
• If there is sufficient pushback, then @arewm we circle back to the arch board and decide if we acquiesce, or tell the users "tough luck"
• If this gets merged into staging, @savitaashture will do some basic smoke testing (either with my tenant, or hers if we are able to get her one in time).
• Also, if @enarha is back from PTO before all this finishes, we'll pull him in for verification as well, given his role(s) on the openshift pipeline team
• If staging testing goes OK, we move on to prod.

[arewm]

Thanks, @gabemontero. @savitaashture, is there an estimated timeline for getting this change merged?

[gabemontero]

Thanks, @gabemontero. @savitaashture, is there an estimated timeline for getting this change merged?

The annoucement to at least the konflux mailing list will be this week. The reaction to that will dictate when I feel comfortable releasing the hold on this. The announcement won't be just stating "this change is happening". It will explain the why, detail the implication to day to day use, and solicit feedback beyond the participants of the last arch board meeting. And make sure no other process steps are required for a change in user experience like.

[openshift-ci]

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

[openshift-ci]

@gabemontero: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
ci/prow/appstudio-e2e-tests	ab80347	link	true	/test appstudio-e2e-tests

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.