-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.8k
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
TEP-0142: Surface step results via termination message #7349
TEP-0142: Surface step results via termination message #7349
Conversation
/hold wait for #7347 to get merged. |
751dda7
to
ad58095
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Steps
write results somewhere (different than /tekton/results
I guess) because:
- we don't want to implicitly set them to TaskRun (it would probably cause an error)
- we don't want to have on step overwrite the result of another
Am I right ?
Doing that, we end up making /tekton/steps
writeable, which I think, is a problem. We should try to find "another place" to write step results. I wonder if we could prefix the result with the step name or something in /tekton/results
instead, and somehow filter those by default (if not bound) ?
ad58095
to
56e6fe9
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
Yes, exactly.
Yes, or I wonder if we could make the step dir inside Writing WDYT? |
56e6fe9
to
d0c55e0
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
8a9cbbe
to
f8732b5
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
f8732b5
to
2f16970
Compare
86ddebf
to
3da292c
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
3da292c
to
9a970dd
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Yongxuanzhang The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
9a970dd
to
9ec9359
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
9ec9359
to
e505a85
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
This PR surfaces step results (i.e results written to $(step.results.<resultName>.path)) via termination messages. A followup PR will handle surfacing the results via sidecar logs.
e505a85
to
39af932
Compare
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
The following is the coverage report on the affected files.
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🎉
/lgtm
This PR surfaces step results (i.e results written to
$(step.results.<resultName>.path)
) via termination messages. A followup PR will handle surfacing the results via sidecar logs.The use of
$(step.results.<resultName>.path)
is currently only available inStepActions
not inlined steps.This PR is part of issue #7259.
Changes
Submitter Checklist
As the author of this PR, please check off the items in this checklist:
/kind <type>
. Valid types are bug, cleanup, design, documentation, feature, flake, misc, question, tepRelease Notes
/kind feature