Switch populateAndUseBuildNamesTable feature flag on the FE
What does this MR do and why?
Switch the populateAndUseBuildNamesTable
feature flag on the frontend.
This changes the aforementioned feature flag to feSearchBuildByName
References
Please include cross links to any resources that are relevant to this MR. This will give reviewers and future readers helpful context to give an efficient review of the changes introduced.
MR acceptance checklist
Please evaluate this MR against the MR acceptance checklist. It helps you analyze changes to reduce risks in quality, performance, reliability, security, and maintainability.
Screenshots or screen recordings
Screenshots are required for UI changes, and strongly recommended for all other merge requests.
Before | After |
---|---|
How to set up and validate locally
Numbered steps to set up and validate the change are strongly suggested.
Merge request reports
Activity
changed milestone to %17.8
assigned to @jivanvl
added pipelinetier-1 label
added sectionci label and removed sectionops label
@mfanGitLab Can you please take a look?
requested review from @mfanGitLab
- Resolved by Simon Knox
- Resolved by Max Fan
added feature flag feature flagexists labels
- Resolved by Max Fan
Reviewer roulette
Category Reviewer Maintainer backend @zhaochen_li
(UTC+11, 17 hours ahead of author)
@msaleiko
(UTC+1, 7 hours ahead of author)
frontend @mcavoj
(UTC+1, 7 hours ahead of author)
@apennells
(UTC-5, 1 hour ahead of author)
~"Verify" Reviewer review is optional for ~"Verify" @rkadam3
(UTC+5.5, 11.5 hours ahead of author)
Please refer to documentation page for guidance on how you can benefit from the Reviewer Roulette, or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.
If needed, you can retry the
danger-review
job that generated this comment.Generated by
DangerEdited by ****added 1 commit
- 9ed64a60 - Switch populateAndUseBuildNamesTable feature flag on the FE
mentioned in merge request !177188 (closed)
added pipeline:mr-approved label
added pipelinetier-3 pipeline:run-e2e-omnibus-once labels and removed pipelinetier-1 label
Before you set this MR to auto-merge
This merge request will progress on pipeline tiers until it reaches the last tier: pipelinetier-3. We will trigger a new pipeline for each transition to a higher tier.
Before you set this MR to auto-merge, please check the following:
- You are the last maintainer of this merge request
- The latest pipeline for this merge request is pipelinetier-3 (You can find which tier it is in the pipeline name)
- This pipeline is recent enough (created in the last 8 hours)
If all the criteria above apply, please set auto-merge for this merge request.
See pipeline tiers and merging a merge request for more details.
requested review from @psimyn
Bundle size analysis [beta]
This compares changes in bundle size for entry points between the commits 10b7d562 and 9ed64a60
Special assetsEntrypoint / Name Size before Size after Diff Diff in percent average 4.42 MB 4.42 MB - 0.0 % mainChunk 3.28 MB 3.28 MB - 0.0 %
Note: We do not have exact data for 10b7d562. So we have used data from: a7797f45.
The target commit was too new, so we used the latest commit from master we have info on.
It might help to rerun thebundle-size-review
job
This might mean that you have a few false positives in this report. If something unrelated to your code changes is reported, you can check this comparison in order to see if they caused this change.Please look at the full report for more details
Read more about how this report works.
Generated by
DangerE2E Test Result Summary
allure-report-publisher
generated test report!e2e-test-on-cng:
test report for 9ed64a60expand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Plan | 86 | 0 | 8 | 0 | 94 | ✅ | | Govern | 84 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 94 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 33 | 0 | 10 | 0 | 43 | ✅ | | Create | 140 | 0 | 19 | 0 | 159 | ✅ | | Verify | 51 | 0 | 15 | 0 | 66 | ✅ | | Package | 30 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 44 | ✅ | | Fulfillment | 2 | 0 | 7 | 0 | 9 | ✅ | | Release | 5 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 6 | ✅ | | Monitor | 8 | 0 | 12 | 0 | 20 | ✅ | | Secure | 2 | 0 | 5 | 0 | 7 | ✅ | | Manage | 1 | 0 | 9 | 0 | 10 | ✅ | | Analytics | 2 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 | ✅ | | Configure | 0 | 0 | 3 | 0 | 3 | ➖ | | Ai-powered | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | Growth | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | | ModelOps | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 444 | 0 | 118 | 0 | 562 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
e2e-test-on-gdk:
test report for 9ed64a60expand test summary
+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | suites summary | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Verify | 100 | 0 | 32 | 0 | 132 | ✅ | | Create | 270 | 0 | 40 | 0 | 310 | ✅ | | Manage | 2 | 0 | 18 | 0 | 20 | ✅ | | Data Stores | 66 | 0 | 20 | 0 | 86 | ✅ | | Plan | 164 | 0 | 16 | 0 | 180 | ✅ | | Package | 50 | 0 | 26 | 0 | 76 | ✅ | | Ai-powered | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | ➖ | | Monitor | 16 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 40 | ✅ | | Secure | 8 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 14 | ✅ | | Release | 10 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 12 | ✅ | | Analytics | 4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 4 | ✅ | | Govern | 160 | 0 | 24 | 0 | 184 | ✅ | | Fulfillment | 4 | 0 | 14 | 0 | 18 | ✅ | | Configure | 0 | 0 | 6 | 0 | 6 | ➖ | | Growth | 0 | 0 | 4 | 0 | 4 | ➖ | | ModelOps | 0 | 0 | 2 | 0 | 2 | ➖ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+ | Total | 854 | 0 | 238 | 0 | 1092 | ✅ | +-------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
Edited by ****added this merge request to the merge train at position 2
mentioned in commit a05f5c09
added workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging-canary label
added workflowstaging label and removed workflowcanary label
added workflowproduction label and removed workflowstaging label
@jivanvl @mfanGitLab this MR removed the entire ability to search jobs by name? Was this intentional?
I think what we should have done is create a new count query without the
name
parameter or make the parameter dynamic based on the new flag state. Given the count query combined with the name parameter is the problematic bit.However if we did go this path the count would not be problematic anymore but it could be a little confusing to users that the count number is off when filtering by name.
Edited by Payton BurdetteUpdate: moved this convo internally https://gitlab.slack.com/archives/CPCJ8CCCX/p1736352331411859 and this MR is the route we want to take
added workflowpost-deploy-db-production label and removed workflowproduction label
added releasedcandidate label
added releasedpublished label and removed releasedcandidate label