[llvm-dev] RFC: New Automated Release Workflow (using Issues and Pull Requests)
Tom Stellard via llvm-dev
llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
Mon Dec 20 21:18:25 PST 2021
On 12/20/21 18:21, Mehdi AMINI wrote:
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 20, 2021 at 3:24 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com <mailto:tstellar at redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> On 12/20/21 09:16, Tom Stellard wrote:
> > On 12/18/21 15:04, David Blaikie wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 6:38 PM Tom Stellard <tstellar at redhat.com <mailto:tstellar at redhat.com> <mailto:tstellar at redhat.com <mailto:tstellar at redhat.com>>> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 12/17/21 16:47, David Blaikie wrote:
> >> > Sounds pretty good to me - wouldn't mind knowing more about/a good summary of the effects of this on project/repo/etc notifications that Mehdi's mentioning. (be good to have a write up of the expected impact/options to then discuss - from the thread so far I understand some general/high level concerns, but it's not clear to me exactly how it plays out)
> >> >
> >>
> >> The impact is really going to depend on the person and what notification preferences they
> >> have/want. If you are already watching the repo with the default settings, then you probably
> >> won't notice much of a difference given the current volume of notifications.
> >>
> >>
> >> I think I'm on the default settings - which does currently mean a notification for every issue update, which is a lot. Given that llvm-bugs at email.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-bugs at email.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-bugs at email.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-bugs at email.llvm.org>> has been re-enabled, sending mail only on issue creation, I & others might opt back in to that behavior by disabling the baseline "notify on everything" to "notify only on issues I'm mentioned in".
> >>
> >> I guess currently the only email that github is generating is one email per issue update. We don't have any pull requests, so there aren't any emails for that, yeah?
> >>
> >> So this new strategy might add a few more back-and-forth on each cherrypick issue (for those using llvm-bugs & disabling general issue notifications, this will not be relevant to them - there won't be more issues created, just more comments on existing issues). But there will be some more emails generated related to the pull requests themselves, I guess? So each cherrypick goes from 2 emails to llvm-bugs (the issue creation and closure) to, how many? 4 (2 for llvm-bugs and I guess at least 2 for the pull request - one to make the request and one to close it - maybe a couple more status ones along the way?)
> >>
> >
> > I think the number of net new comments on issues will be very minimal or none at all. The
> > automated comments that are created by this process are replacing comments that I'm already making
> > manually.
> >
> > So 2+ for pull requests is probably a good estimate. I still need to figure out how many notifications
> > get generated for Actions with the default settings.
> >
>
> I did some research on the notifications and here is what I came up with:
>
> From what I can tell, notifications for actions are only sent to the
> user that initiated the event that led to the actions, so there would
> be no global notifications sent for the actions used by this workflow.
>
> There have been 131 bugs marked as release blockers in the llvm-13 cycle,
> this includes the 13.0.0 and 13.0.1 release. In the best case scenario,
> this proposal would generate 2 additional notifications per issue
> (1 for creating a pull request and 1 for merging it), and 0 net new
> issue comments (the automated comments just replace manual comments).
>
> If you assume that no manual comments would be replaced by the automation,
> then in the typical use case there would be a maximum of 4 notifications
> generated from issues (/cherry-pick comment, cherry-pick failed comment,
> /branch comment, /pull-request comment). In addition to the 2 pull
> request notifications.
>
> Based on this, my estimate is that this proposal will produce between
> (2 * 131) = 262 and (6 * 131) = 786 net new notifications every 6 months.
> Or between 1.46 and 4.367 net new notifications per day.
>
> For comparison, on Fri Dec 17, I received 115 email notifications from
> the llvm/llvm-project repo.
>
> The pull request emails should be easy for people to filter out of their
> inboxes with a rule. Pull request emails would have llvm/llvm-project in
> the To: field and have '(PR #123456)' at the end of the Subject: field
> (where 123456 is pull request number).
>
>
> Actually it isn't enough: there isn't a way to filter on regexes in gmail for example. Until GitHub allows the use of some different alias / target / cc-email or similar mechanisms, it'll be hard to filter GitHub emails accurately / reliably.
>
Matching on '(PR #' might be enough if people wanted to try it.
> There are also the confusing aspects of starting to use pull-requests in the monorepo, but only for some branches, which seem undesirable to me.
>
Yeah, this is one of the downsides of using pull-requests in the monorepo.
> You didn't really elaborate about why not use a repo dedicated for managing your actions and everything else? Seems like a conservative choice that would provide isolation while still having the feature you desired, wouldn't it?
>
One advantage of using the monorepo for the pull-requests is that it simplifies
the workflow. With pull-requests in a secondary repo, there would have to be an
additional step to sync from the secondary repo into the monorepo after the
pull-request was merged. You would also need to setup a sync from the monorepo
to the secondary repo in case something was pushed directly to the monorepo.
Using the monorepo for pull requests also makes it easier to enable self-hosted
action runners, because you would only need to set them up for one repo and
wouldn't have to figure out how to coordinate their usage between two.
And if we were able to get GitHub to give us access to some of their more powerful
runners, it might be more difficult to enable them for both repos.
- Tom
>
>
> For people who filter out the pull request notifications, they would have between
> 0 and 2.9 net new notifications per day.
>
> - Tom
>
>
> > --Tom
> >
> >> If people want to give their notification preferences, I can try to look at how
> >> this change will impact specific configurations.
> >>
> >>
> >> @Mehdi AMINI <mailto:joker.eph at gmail.com <mailto:joker.eph at gmail.com>> - are there particular scenarios you have in mind that'd be good to work through?
> >>
> >>
> >> -Tom
> >>
> >>
> >> > On Fri, Dec 17, 2021 at 1:15 PM Tom Stellard via llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>>> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > Here is a proposal for a new automated workflow for managing parts of the release
> >> > process. I've been experimenting with this over the past few releases and
> >> > now that we have migrated to GitHub issues, it would be possible for us to
> >> > implement this in the main repo.
> >> >
> >> > The workflow is pretty straight forward, but it does use pull requests. My
> >> > idea is to enable pull requests for only this automated workflow and not
> >> > for general development (i.e. We would still use Phabricator for code review).
> >> > Let me know what you think about this:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > # Workflow
> >> >
> >> > * On an existing issue or a newly created issue, a user who wants to backport
> >> > one or more commits to the release branch adds a comment:
> >> >
> >> > /cherry-pick <commit_sha> <..>
> >> >
> >> > * This starts a GitHub Action job that attempts to cherry-pick the commit(s)
> >> > to the current release branch.
> >> >
> >> > * If the commit(s) can be cherry-picked cleanly, then the GitHub Action:
> >> > * Pushes the result of the cherry-pick to a branch in the
> >> > llvmbot/llvm-project repo called issue<n>, where n is the number of the
> >> > GitHub Issue that launched the Action.
> >> >
> >> > * Adds this comment on the issue: /branch llvmbot/llvm-project/issue<n>
> >> >
> >> > * Creates a pull request from llvmbot/llvm-project/issue<n> to
> >> > llvm/llvm-project/release/XX.x
> >> >
> >> > * Adds a comment on the issue: /pull-request #<n>
> >> > where n is the number of the pull request.
> >> >
> >> > * If the commit(s) can't be cherry-picked cleanly, then the GitHub Action job adds
> >> > the release:cherry-pick-failed label to the issue and adds a comment:
> >> > "Failed to cherry-pick <commit_sha> <..>" along with a link to the failing
> >> > Action.
> >> >
> >> > * If a user has manually cherry-picked the fixes, resolved the conflicts, and
> >> > pushed the result to a branch on github, they can automatically create a pull
> >> > request by adding this comment to an issue: /branch <user>/<repo>/<branch>
> >> >
> >> > * Once a pull request has been created, this launches more GitHub Actions
> >> > to run pre-commit tests.
> >> >
> >> > * Once the tests complete successfully and the changes have been approved
> >> > by the release manager, the pull request can me merged into the release branch.
> >> >
> >> > * After the pull request is merged, a GitHub Action automatically closes the
> >> > associated issue.
> >> >
> >> > Some Examples:
> >> >
> >> > Cherry-pick success: https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729>>
> >> > Cherry-pick <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729Cherry-pick <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729Cherry-pick> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729Cherry-pick <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/729Cherry-pick>>> failure: https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730>> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/730>>>
> >> > Manual Branch comment: https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710>> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710 <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/issues/710>>>
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > # Motivation
> >> >
> >> > Why do this? The goal is to make the release process more efficient and transparent.
> >> > With this new workflow, users can get automatic and immediate feedback when a commit
> >> > they want backported doesn't apply cleanly or introduces some test failures. With
> >> > the current process, these kinds of issues are communicated by the release manager,
> >> > and it can be days or even weeks before a problem is discovered and communicated back
> >> > to the users.
> >> >
> >> > Another advantage of this workflow is it introduces pre-commit CI to the release branch,
> >> > which is important for the stability of the branch and the releases, but also gives
> >> > the project an opportunity to experiment with new CI workflows in a way that
> >> > does not disrupt development on the main branch.
> >> >
> >> > # Implementation
> >> >
> >> > If this proposal is accepted, I would plan to implement this for the LLVM 14 release cycle based
> >> > on the following proof of concept that I have been testing for the last few releases:
> >> >
> >> > https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml>> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow.yml>>>
> >> > https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml>> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-workflow-create-pr.yml>>>
> >> > https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml>> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml> <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml <https://github.com/tstellar/llvm-project/blob/release-automation/.github/workflows/release-merge-pr.yml>>>
> >> >
> >> > Thanks,
> >> > Tom
> >> >
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > LLVM Developers mailing list
> >> > llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org> <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org <mailto:llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>>>
> >> > https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev> <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>> <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev> <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev <https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev>>>
> >> >
> >>
> >
>
More information about the llvm-dev
mailing list