Skip to content
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

[skip ci] is not respected for put #196

Closed
giner opened this issue Jun 8, 2018 · 4 comments
Closed

[skip ci] is not respected for put #196

giner opened this issue Jun 8, 2018 · 4 comments

Comments

@giner
Copy link

giner commented Jun 8, 2018

Commits with [skip ci] should not update version of the resource if disable_ci_skip is enabled.

In case of pipeline like this:
gitrepo_resource -> GET -> something_doing_job -> PUT -> gitrepo_resource
The PUT updates the version and something_doing_job is triggered again.

There is a workaround described in #18, however this makes pipeline messy and harder to read.

@dazigna
Copy link

dazigna commented Aug 8, 2018

Is anyone working on this issue ?

@kalfa
Copy link

kalfa commented Nov 26, 2018

+1 for this.

create another resource for that is also a waste, since it requires a further running container for each resource modified for each pipeline defined.

nowadays it's a fairly common practice to have pipelines to update a version-pinning file (e.g. Pipfile.lock in pipenv/python world), I wouldn't consider it a corner use case.

would this example work? https://stackoverflow.com/questions/42607033/how-to-commit-changes-to-git-in-concourse-build
it doesn't require a new resource, which while is still unglish, is a better solution than #18.

@vito
Copy link
Member

vito commented Mar 9, 2019

This issue is impossible to fix in the git resource, which is why #18 was closed (though in hindsight the reason for closing could have been clearer). It's a design problem in Concourse which we're tackling as part of concourse/rfcs#1 (and tangentially concourse/rfcs#11).

I've opened concourse/concourse#3463 so there's something more concrete to point to, but I'm going to close this again as there's nothing we can do on the git resource's side for this and we've already planned work elsewhere for the actual fix.

@vito vito closed this as completed Mar 9, 2019
@kalfa
Copy link

kalfa commented Mar 12, 2019

Thanks @vito

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants