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

Better log output to console #21

Merged
merged 11 commits into from
May 28, 2019
Merged

Conversation

chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor

This change improves what the plugin logs to the console to it is easier for the user to identify what the plugin is looking for and where.

Updated the tests

@chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor Author

I cant correlate the error to my PR. Any help? cc/ @basil

@basil
Copy link
Member

basil commented Jul 5, 2018

I think I see the problem here, which is that you're referring to a variable named build, which was renamed to run in #12. If this is working for your locally, I suspect this may be because you haven't merged/rebased with master on your local branch. The CI system is automatically rebasing your change against master, which seems to be why the conflict is only present in CI builds.

@chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Oh I totally missed that one!
Thanks for pointing me to it. Will update soon

@chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor Author

I finally made it work.
This PR is ready to be reviewed cc/ @basil

Copy link
Member

@basil basil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just one minor comment. Other than that, this looks good to go!

@@ -128,24 +128,29 @@ private void findText(Run<?, ?> run, FilePath workspace, TaskListener listener)
boolean foundText = false;

if (alsoCheckConsoleOutput) {
logger.println("Checking console output");
// Do not mention the pattern we are looking for to avoid false positives
logger.println("Looking for a specific pattern in the console output");
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks great! Thanks for doing this. There's only one minor comment I have. The wording of the message "Looking for a specific pattern in the console output" seems potentially confusing to the end user. To me, this message raises the question: "What is that specific pattern?" Of course, we can't tell the user what the specific pattern is, because that would lead to a false positive, as your comment states. How about if we changed the logic such that instead of printing "Looking for a specific pattern in the console output", we printed "Searched for pattern X in the console output" after performing the search? That way, we'd avoid the false positive. We'd probably want to change the behavior for files to do the same thing, for consistency. Then we'd be able to print the pattern in the message in both cases. Let me know what you think of this idea. If you don't think it's worth the additional work, then I'm fine with this change as-is.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for taking the time on thinking about this!
I also went through this a couple of times, I really wanted to show the pattern but felt it required some user feedback BEFORE starting looking.
I was thinking on saving the console log, print message and then do the search on the saved content but the size might be too big in memory in certain situations.
I will try to apply your suggestion, adding a message BEFORE the search so the user knows what is happening.

@chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor Author

Expected changes required

@chipironcin
Copy link
Contributor Author

@basil when you have a chance would you mind checking the latest changes? I added a new log line before the search explaining a search is about to start. Hope you like the approach

@sparkoo
Copy link
Contributor

sparkoo commented Apr 12, 2019

cool, I would welcome this. @basil do you plan to merge this?

Copy link
Member

@basil basil left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry for the delay in reviewing. This looks good to me!

@basil basil merged commit f9f1e2d into jenkinsci:master May 28, 2019
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

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants