Details
-
Type:
Bug
-
Status: Resolved (View Workflow)
-
Priority:
Critical
-
Resolution: Fixed
-
Component/s: pipeline
-
Labels:
-
Similar Issues:
-
Epic Link:
-
Sprint:Blue Ocean 1.2-beta2, Blue Ocean 1.2-beta3, Blue Ocean 1.2-beta4, Blue Ocean 1.2, Blue Ocean 1.3, Blue Ocean 1.4 - beta 1
-
Released As:Blue Ocean 1.17.0, Pipeline: API 2.34, Pipeline: Basic Steps 2.18, Pipeline: Graph Analysis 1.10, Pipeline: Groovy 2.70, Pipeline: Declarative 1.3.9, JUnit: 1.28, Warnings Next Generation 5.2.0
Description
Problem
When there is a build which has a stage that marks the build as unstable, all the stages, parallels and steps are marked incorrectly as unstable than just the unstable stage, parallel and step that caused the Pipeline to be unstable.
To reproduce
- Build the multibranch pipeline "kzantow/failure-project" from github
- Look at the "michaelneale" branch
- Note that all stages are unstable (check the api json, all stages are UNSTABLE but should not be, only the final stage should be).
Attachments
Issue Links
- is blocked by
-
JENKINS-26522 Annotated block/stage status
-
- Closed
-
-
JENKINS-43995 Individual Pipeline steps and stages/blocks should have Result statuses
-
- Resolved
-
- is duplicated by
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Closed
-
- is related to
-
-
- Open
-
-
-
- Reopened
-
-
-
- Open
-
-
-
- Open
-
- relates to
-
-
- Resolved
-
-
-
- Resolved
-
-
-
- Closed
-
-
-
- Resolved
-
-
-
- Resolved
-
- links to
Activity
Devin's blog post explains this issue and the fix well Brian J Murrell
The fix doesn't make B Stage run, or not run - it still leaves it down to the implementor to choose if they want B to run or not
I have read Devin's blog post. It does not answer my question AFAIU. But you might think it could because you misunderstood my question.
My question was not about whole stages running or not running. Both stages A and B are running. B was SUCCESSFUL and A was UNSTABLE. What I am seeing however is that B's post->unstable is being run even though B was successful.
I am trying to determine if that mis-behaviour is a component of this bug or if this is something different/new.
Brian J Murrell
added a comment - I have read Devin's blog post. It does not answer my question AFAIU. But you might think it could because you misunderstood my question.
My question was not about whole stages running or not running. Both stages A and B are running. B was SUCCESSFUL and A was UNSTABLE . What I am seeing however is that B 's post -> unstable is being run even though B was successful.
I am trying to determine if that mis-behaviour is a component of this bug or if this is something different/new. Brian J Murrell Declarative post conditions look at the overall build result, so if a step like unstable or junit marks the build as unstable in stage A and the Pipeline continues executing, unstable post conditions in later stages such as B will execute (unless the build result becomes worse than unstable, e.g. failure). As far as I know Declarative has always worked this way. Before the fix for this issue, both stage A and stage B would have been shown as being unstable in Blue Ocean, but after the fix for this issue, only stage A is shown as unstable (the overall build result was shown as unstable both before and after the fix).
Devin Nusbaum Whoa! Are you serious (and sure of what you are saying)? It seems very un-intuitive, at best, that the status of any individual given stage should be able to alter the status of any other stage. I would absolutely agree that the outer pipeline {} block's post should be executed per the overall build result, but most certainly not any individual stage.
I suppose there must be some, can't imagine a use-case where that is useful. On the contrary, if one has a parallel block of test stages, why would I want the unstable post block of test stage A to run when test stage A passed, but test stage B failed?
Ultimately, I suppose this should move to a new ticket. I will open one. But I probably need to mock up a minimal reproducer before I do.
Brian J Murrell
added a comment - Devin Nusbaum Whoa! Are you serious (and sure of what you are saying)? It seems very un-intuitive, at best , that the status of any individual given stage should be able to alter the status of any other stage. I would absolutely agree that the outer pipeline { } block's post should be executed per the overall build result, but most certainly not any individual stage.
I suppose there must be some, can't imagine a use-case where that is useful. On the contrary, if one has a parallel block of test stages, why would I want the unstable post block of test stage A to run when test stage A passed, but test stage B failed?
Ultimately, I suppose this should move to a new ticket. I will open one. But I probably need to mock up a minimal reproducer before I do.
Was this more than just a visualisation problem or was this actually making stage B run it's post->unstable steps if stage A was UNSTABLE and set the overall build status to UNSTABLE? Because that would be very bad/wrong.