Skip to content

Expose fedora-review results to users#32

Open
FrostyX wants to merge 11 commits intopackit:mainfrom
FrostyX:fedora-review-2
Open

Expose fedora-review results to users#32
FrostyX wants to merge 11 commits intopackit:mainfrom
FrostyX:fedora-review-2

Conversation

@FrostyX
Copy link
Contributor

@FrostyX FrostyX commented Feb 28, 2026

See #27
This is a follow-up after PR #28

@FrostyX
Copy link
Contributor Author

FrostyX commented Feb 28, 2026

You can see an example here:

$ testing-farm request
    --git-url https://github.com/FrostyX/tmt-plans.git  \
    --git-ref fedora-review-2 \
    --plan /plans/fedora-review \
    -e KOJI_TASK_ID=142668218 \
    --context initiator=fedora-ci \
    --context trigger=commit \
    --compose Fedora-latest

📦 repository https://github.com/FrostyX/tmt-plans.git ref fedora-review-2 test-type fmf
💻 Fedora-latest on x86_64
🔎 api https://api.dev.testing-farm.io/v0.1/requests/759f2516-8d45-492a-9426-c4e102441394
💡 waiting for request to finish, use ctrl+c to skip
👷 request is queued
🚀 request is running
🚢 artifacts https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/759f2516-8d45-492a-9426-c4e102441394
❌ tests failed
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┓
┃ id                                   ┃ state    ┃ artifacts                                                                  ┃ overall ┃ arches_requested ┃ errored_plans ┃ failed_plans ┃ skipped_plans ┃ passed_plans ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┩
│ 759f2516-8d45-492a-9426-c4e102441394 │ complete │ https://artifacts.dev.testing-farm.io/759f2516-8d45-492a-9426-c4e102441394 │ failed  │ x86_64           │ 0             │ 1            │ 0             │ 0            │
└──────────────────────────────────────┴──────────┴────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┴─────────┴──────────────────┴───────────────┴──────────────┴───────────────┴──────────────┘
┏━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━┳━━━━━━━━┓
┃ plan                 ┃ x86_64 ┃
┡━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━━╇━━━━━━━━┩
│ /plans/fedora-review │ fail   │
└──────────────────────┴────────┘

<p>
See also:
<ul>
<li><a href="https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Package_Review_Process/">Package Review Process</a></li>
Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you fix these to open in a new window. At least it breaks for me in testing-farm if that is not the case.

Comment on lines +36 to +43
data = [
{
"name": "/",
"result": result.value,
"note": [f"{issues} issues"],
"log": ["viewer.html"] + FEDORA_REVIEW_RESULTS,
}
]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I have a feeling that properly unpack/expand the results into check or subresult would be too much effort 👀

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍 for subresult. Check has a more specialized meaning, so better to avoid it. However the rendering is quite mysterious with those, I don't really know how it would handle them, best to check with testing-farm folks on that.

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