Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Unable to release due to test failures #754

Open
loicmathieu opened this issue Jan 28, 2025 · 11 comments
Open

Unable to release due to test failures #754

loicmathieu opened this issue Jan 28, 2025 · 11 comments

Comments

@loicmathieu
Copy link
Collaborator

https://github.com/quarkiverse/quarkus-google-cloud-services/actions/runs/12992225677/job/36274041597

@jfbenckhuijsen if you can have a look, otherwise I'll disable this test for now...

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

@loicmathieu same issue again I think? There is no logging of the actual docker container, which fails to start, so this is a bit of an educated guess ( I need to fix this in the future somehow..) , but if I scan through the workflow files, the npm install step is missing there, which would mean the docker container won't boot up due to the lack of node_modules.

So I think we can just add that npm install step, just need to figure out where to put it (haven't dived into the release process yet and it incudes quite a bit of other files, i.e. if you have a pointer, that would help getting it fixed quickly)

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

Would adding a script that would get invoked here https://github.com/quarkiverse/.github/blob/c4f83117e90e92b931ea21c7fcec4c5b991b0169/.github/workflows/prepare-release.yml#L102 work?

And then in the script first install NPM (as that is not present in the base image) and after that do an npm install?

So far that seems to only hook we have?

(Btw. for the future I'm thinking about using something like the fabri8 docker maven plugin to run that NPM install from maven, avoiding all the workflow changes which seems kinda brittle, also from a local dev perspective, as you need to know you need to run npm install in advance or else the build will fail. But that;s probably a bit of a stretch to get running so short before release)

@loicmathieu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

So this is quite annoying as this prepare-release step is a step coming from the parent Quarkiverse release mechanism.
It may be enough to add it here: https://github.com/quarkiverse/quarkus-google-cloud-services/blob/main/.github/workflows/release-prepare.yml

We may have the same issue for perform-release :(

But I think the best would be to start node from Maven, for ex with a container using Fabric8 https://maven.fabric8.io/

@loicmathieu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

Yeah exactly, main reason to go for that fabri8 approach, way easier on all the maven steps and way easier for anyone working on this.

I'll have a look at implementing this, tnx for the reference, up to you if you want to delay the release a bit or just disable the test for now. Hope to get this done somewhere this week, but it's a bit time permitting..

@loicmathieu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

I didn't remember when Quarkus 3.18 will be released but it may be very soon so better to release without the test or it will not be part of the next platform release

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

I didn't remember when Quarkus 3.18 will be released but it may be very soon so better to release without the test or it will not be part of the next platform release

Just created an initial version of the fix which might just work. Build is running right now.

Once that succeeds I can remove the node stuff from the workflow files.

Once done if you could start those ecosystem builds, we might get this running today

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

@loicmathieu build succeeded, just pushed the change for the ecosystem CI, can you give that one a kick?

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

#756

@jfbenckhuijsen
Copy link
Contributor

Failed again I see? Maybe just go ahead with out that test, would need more investigation to see why it's failing. @loicmathieu

@loicmathieu
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Yes, I disabled both test until we find a solution.
The release is now done.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants