Bodhi updates for development branches show as "skipped" and are not linked.

[ckelleyRH]

What happened? What is the problem?

Bodhi updates for development branches (f40 and rawhide at the time of writing) are displayed as "skipped" in the new Bodhi Update job section added in #215: https://dashboard.packit.dev/jobs/bodhi-updates

I'm not sure what "skipped" means in context for Packit but, for example:
https://dashboard.packit.dev/results/bodhi-updates/266
https://dashboard.packit.dev/results/bodhi-updates/265

Alias "not provided" and Update Creation Time "not provided", but the Bodhi updates are actually created by Packit:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-289a641391
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-75d641297c

What did you expect to happen?

Development branch updates come through with "success" and a link to the Bodhi update is provided.

Example URL(s)

https://dashboard.packit.dev/jobs/bodhi-updates

Steps to reproduce

1. GOTO https://dashboard.packit.dev/jobs/bodhi-updates
2. Inspect any `f40` or `rawhide` update
3.

Workaround

• There is an existing workaround that can be used until this issue is fixed.

Participation

• I am willing to submit a pull request for this issue. (Packit team is happy to help!)

[ckelleyRH]

Well, I said there is no workaround but one can simply go to Bodhi and look for the update (which is what I did). I knew it existed because the version bump Bugzilla was updated with links to both updates: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2265008

[lbarcziova]

hi @ckelleyRH ! Thanks for this issue.

but the Bodhi updates are actually created by Packit

Even though Bodhi UI shows that they were created by packit user, those are actually triggered automatically, see the docs. Therefore from Packit side, there is really no submission time or anything. You can also see This update was automatically created in the update detail you linked.

I get your point it might not be clear looking at our dashboard and am wondering what could we improve since ideally, we want to display only actions that were really triggered/processed by Packit. We could definitely at least provide this explanation in the dashboard.

[ckelleyRH]

I get your point it might not be clear looking at our dashboard and am wondering what could we improve since ideally, we want to display only actions that were really triggered/processed by Packit. We could definitely at least provide this explanation in the dashboard.

If we're saying that we only want to show updates that were actually generated by Packit, rather than just looking like they were to the untrained observer, then perhaps development branch updates shouldn't be displayed at all? I wouldn't have thought about this at all probably if they weren't displayed, I would have just seen the bug closed due to the update going straight to stable and moved on.

[majamassarini]

I went through the logs and found this error: {"status": "error", "errors": [{"location": "body", "name": "builds", "description": "Update for fasterxml-oss-parent-58-1.fc40 already exists"}]}
We marked it as skipped because of this error.

We usually suggest to put in the bodhi_update job definition the fedora-branched alias as a target.
Because bodhi updates are triggered automatically for the development branches. And for this reason we got an error.

But probably we can do something to improve ux.

[ckelleyRH]

We usually suggest to put in the bodhi_update job definition the fedora-branched alias as a target. Because bodhi updates are triggered automatically for the development branches. And for this reason we got an error.

Yes, I can go through and update all the configurations so that this doesn't happen at all, thanks for the pointer!

[ckelleyRH]

@majamassarini - does fedora-branched include f40 (I expect it does)? If so, even if I fix my configs to not build for rawhide, it will still trigger this behaviour for f40 right?

[majamassarini]

yes, it should include f40. This behaviour puzzled me too (the automatic update for f40). I think this could be something temporary since the branching has happened not so long ago. But let's see what others say (@lbarcziova or @lachmanfrantisek).

[lbarcziova]

Yes, this should be only temporary, until it reaches Updates-testing Activation, after that, the updates for f40 will not be created automatically.

[majamassarini]

@lbarcziova A small improvement ux could be to set the status of the bodhi update to something like already updated instead of putting it as skipped when we got an exception having "Update for ... already exists" and in this case linking directly the bodhi service. WDYT?

[lbarcziova]

yes, that could improve the UX :) (or automatically updated instead)

[ckelleyRH]

Yes, this should be only temporary, until it reaches Updates-testing Activation, after that, the updates for f40 will not be created automatically.

Currently I have a basically identical Packit set up in every repo like this:

jobs:
- job: pull_from_upstream
  trigger: release
  dist_git_branches:
    - fedora-development
 
- job: koji_build
  trigger: commit
  dist_git_branches:
    - fedora-development
 
- job: bodhi_update
  trigger: commit
  dist_git_branches:
    - fedora-development

So I want to only do rebases in rawhideand if there is an embryonic stable branch like f40 is now, I want that rebase in that branch too - hence fedora-development.

If I am to not create the Bodhi update for rawhide, which I agree is unnecessary, to what can I change fedora-development? There doesn't appear to be a sensible way of doing this...

[majamassarini]

If I am to not create the Bodhi update for rawhide, which I agree is unnecessary, to what can I change fedora-development? There doesn't appear to be a sensible way of doing this...

I am not sure I am following you. I think you simply don't need a Packit bodhi_update job.

[ckelleyRH]

If I am to not create the Bodhi update for rawhide, which I agree is unnecessary, to what can I change fedora-development? There doesn't appear to be a sensible way of doing this...

I am not sure I am following you. I think you simply don't need a Packit bodhi_update job.

I think I may be just confused, but it doesn't matter anyway because the team has decided to use fedora-rawhide and drop bodhi-update so this all goes away for us. Thanks for answering the scope creep questions (sorry)!