On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 08:25:45PM -0500, Ralph Bean wrote:
On Tue, Nov 08, 2016 at 04:04:38PM +0100, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 03, 2016 at 09:18:43AM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> > This is likely also
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/4022
> > Perhaps I should close that one UPSTREAM?
> > (I have no idea if it still needs fixing)
>
> Nah that's bug in our git hook that is in ansible.
>
> There are two ways to go about it:
> - Announce git branch that are removed
> - Don't
> (on pagure I took the second approach).
>
> If we want to take the first approach, we'll need to adjust
> fedmsg_meta_fedora_infra for a new topic.
>
> I can take this one, any preferred solution?
I don't have a preference on which route you take, Pierre.
But, this brings up a separate, new issue: we did a good thing and a
bad thing.
The good thing is that when Mike Bonnet wrote the dist-git message
hook for Red Hat's dist-git, we did our best to copy the message
format published by the Fedora hook. The goal here is that we can now
write message consumers that respond to either Fedora dist-git
messages or RH dist-git messages.. and they'll just work (fingers
crossed). We can share more infrastructure code!
Cool :)
The bad thing is that we copied the code for the dist-git hook and
rewrote it to use the internal message bus tech (my bad). So now, if
you add a new message type (deleting a branch) we won't inherit that
automatically over on the RH side. We'll have to keep updating our
hook every time you update yours. Worse, you may introduce a change
that we never notice, and then we'll be weirdly out of sync.
Is there a way/possibility to correct this now?
Thanks for the info, I'll try to keep it in mind and to ping you when we change
this hook.
Pierre