This effort includes a Problem Validation issue to interview customers from different industries about their current process for CI/CD workflow standardization and pipeline authoring, as well as user flow mapping and high level design exploration.
Interviews with some of the users that posted feedback on gitlab-org/gitlab#327688 (closed) to better understand what are the issues that require prioritization and how can we better improve our pipeline graph (e.g. table view)
@lauraMon I see that one is already in %14.0 - so we may need to do a bit more investigation into that issue to determine a way forward, possibly in 14.1. Maybe we can treat that as an investigation spike for now as we haven't determined the root cause.
@dhershkovitch We aren't sure yet, though it's most likely a backend issue, but we probably need both frontend and backend to investigate. On the frontend we should try and log even more information to sentry because it's not very useful as is.
So yes, I would vote or an investigation spike this milestone for both frontend and backend and hopefully we can have a fix planned for 14.1
This issue seems more appropriate to surface that we should probably focus on resolving gitlab-org/gitlab#323213 (comment 589310735) in %14.1, if not sooner (e.g. 14.0, maybe if Deliverables are done?).
@dhershkovitch If we do want to bring this in, I think Matija would be a good person to help with this investigation/implementation.
I have looked into this some more (thanks to @f_caplette's awesome investigations for getting me so far!). There are notes on the issue but basically, this appears to be (at minimum) two problems that result in the same error.
There is the problem with large queries timing out, covered in gitlab-org/gitlab#323213 (closed). This is a backend fix and I would love to ship it as soon as we can, even in %14.0, if there is space. That's because it might be obscuring something else and we won't know until it is out. Since it's on self-hosted that would mean waiting the whole milestone to get this data. (This is the issue @cheryl.li is talking about just above.)
There is also the problem with the query parameter length causing queries to fail on various self-hosted infrastructures. That's the one we are talking about in gitlab-org/gitlab#329895 (comment 590837510). The tricky bit here is that just stripping the characters causing issues is not straightforward based on how the library works. I have a medium-term (frontend) and long-term (fullstack) solution for this, and will put together an issue explaining it.
If that's a frontend issue I don't see any problem working on it, %14.0 is mainly focused on breaking change ~bug and ~"technical debt" so it does fall into those categories
I want to make sure I capture the right plan to get this resolved
I don't know about scheduling gitlab-org/gitlab#329895 (closed), because I expect the three listed issues will cover all the reasons it is appearing but I don't know for sure. So I would keep it around till 1 and 2 are done and then we'll know if we can close it.
@dhershkovitch Any chance we could pick up an issue or two around UI polish?
This issue could be broken down so we only add "View pipeline" button. It should be easy and important for usability as it'll make the pipeline link more discoverable.
Work on proposals for the top priority around the pipeline graph (discussions started on some of them already, I think we should only move forward the top 1-2 improvements at first)
Getting familiarized with variables, perhaps there will be some issues that require UX consideration or we could run problem validation?
Is there anything else we should focus on? One thing that is pretty high priority is CI onboarding. Maybe I could collab with Emily on improving our empty states, or work on that special ADO pipeline editor empty state... Or the Pipeline Editor onboarding walkthrough with tooltips. 🤔
This issue could be broken down so we only add "View pipeline" button. It should be easy and important for usability as it'll make the pipeline link more discoverable.
I've labeled it as Verify candidate so it might get picked up by one of the verify engineers
Also noticed that we now have two implementation issues for the templates button. Should we turn this one into a design issue?
Done
Getting familiarized with variables, perhaps there will be some issues that require UX consideration or we could run problem validation?
Instead,I would do a round of interviews with some of the users that posted feedback on gitlab-org/gitlab#327688 (closed) to better understand what are the issues that require prioritization and how can we better improve our pipeline graph (e.g. table view)
Is there anything else we should focus on? One thing that is pretty high priority is CI onboarding. Maybe I could collab with Emily on improving our empty states, or work on that special ADO pipeline editor empty state... Or the Pipeline Editor onboarding walkthrough with tooltips.
I've labeled it as Verify candidate so it might get picked up by one of the verify engineers
@dhershkovitch I am just wondering if this can actually be a candidate given @mgandres and @lauraMon conversation, it seemed like this needs backend work as well. This label is pretty new, but I also thought we had discussed making sure to ask an engineer from our team before applying the label to make sure the group engineers have refined enough that it can be picked by other groups.
I suppose we can schedule this as number 7 in the list (Verify candidate placeholder), still, the fact that it requires backend is a concern since we don't have much capacity
@dhershkovitch Yep, I've asked Furkan to get it weighted. I think whether it's suited for 14.1 or 14.2 depends on what his recommendation (and weight) is. If we still can't easily determine a resolution forward in time for 14.1, it probably makes more sense for 14.2.
@lauraMon since the frontend work was completed by @f_caplette i want to make sure gitlab-org/gitlab#30632 (closed) is scoped with the remaining work left and to make sure we have enough time to test this feature thoroughly
@dhershkovitch I'm closing out 3 issues that were assigned to me this week so no need to carry any over (they aren't carried over but just wanted to confirm).
The same stage job needs deliverable will need some feature flag work, but that's part of the rollout issue.