Re: Email based retest request process: proposal for new pull/re-apply feature

[Patrick Robb <probb@iol.unh.edu>]

On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 12:06 PM Adam Hassick <ahassick@iol.unh.edu> wrote:
>
>
> I'm not opposed to having the contexts be a key-value pair argument
> like the others, however that does break backwards compatibility with
> our existing syntax. If we don't care very much about backwards
> compatibility, then we could make this change.
>
> Instead of having a boolean and a string parameter for whether to
> rebase and the branch to rebase on, we could have a single argument
> specifying a branch. Then, labs rebase on the given branch and then
> rerun all tests if the "rebase=<branch>" argument is present. This
> would look like:
>
> Recheck-request: rebase=main, iol-sample-apps-testing,
> iol-unit-amd64-testing, iol-broadcom-Performance

I agree with this approach because it preserves backward
compatibility, while still providing us with all the functionality we
need. We will also be able to accept key value arguments in the future
if further feature requests come in which require it.

> I don't think the context should be required if the request includes
> the rebase argument, because we do not want to mix valid and invalid
> test results as Aaron said.
> This would be a valid format if contexts are optional:
>
> Recheck-request: rebase=main

Okay, I agree that contexts should not be considered by labs when we
use rebase - but of course we will still store the contexts (if they
are submitted) alongside the key value args. In the future there may
be an application for this.

Zhoumin, does this sound acceptable, or do you think there are any
flaws? If it works, we will implement the updates and try to upstream
this week. Thanks!