Fix flaky import_export/group/tree_saver_spec.rb spec

The spec previously expected the last board in the serialized response to be the one with the milestone, but the database may return the boards in any order. We make the test more robust by searching for the specific board ID that has the milestone.

Closes #208763 (closed)

changed the description

changed milestone to %12.9

added Engineering Productivity Pick into auto-deploy priority1 test labels

assigned to @mayra-cabrera and unassigned @stanhu

assigned to @stanhu and unassigned @mayra-cabrera

added backstage [DEPRECATED] label

resolved all threads

added 1 commit

• ed802649 - Fix flaky import_export/group/tree_saver_spec.rb spec

Compare with previous version

assigned to @mayra-cabrera and unassigned @stanhu

	1 Warning
	ed802649: The commit subject length is acceptable, but please try to reduce it to 50 characters.

Commit message standards

One or more commit messages do not meet our Git commit message standards.

For more information on how to write a good commit message, take a look at How to Write a Git Commit Message.

Here is an example of a good commit message:

Reject ruby interpolation in externalized strings

When using ruby interpolation in externalized strings, they can't be
detected. Which means they will never be presented to be translated.

To mix variables into translations we need to use `sprintf`
instead.

Instead of:

    _("Hello #{subject}")

Use:

    _("Hello %{subject}") % { subject: 'world' }

This is an example of a bad commit message:

updated README.md

This commit message is bad because although it tells us that README.md is updated, it doesn't tell us why or how it was updated.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected! A merge request is normally reviewed by both a reviewer and a maintainer in its primary category (e.g. frontend or backend), and by a maintainer in all other categories.

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has randomly picked a candidate for each review slot. Feel free to override this selection if you think someone else would be better-suited, or the chosen person is unavailable.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, mention them as you normally would! Danger does not (yet?) automatically notify them for you.

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	Vitali Tatarintev (@ck3g)	Rémy Coutable (@rymai)

Generated by Danger

approved this merge request

I suppose this is another flaky failure https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/jobs/459976509?

 Finished in 11 minutes 32 seconds (files took 55.2 seconds to load)
 1535 examples, 4 failures, 11 pending
 Failed examples:
 rspec './ee/spec/lib/ee/gitlab/usage_data_spec.rb[1:1:1:3:9:1]' # Gitlab::UsageData when the feature flag usage_ping_batch_counter is set to true .uncached_data when not on Gitlab.com for secure includes accurate usage_activity_by_stage data
 rspec './ee/spec/lib/ee/gitlab/usage_data_spec.rb[1:1:1:3:9:2]' # Gitlab::UsageData when the feature flag usage_ping_batch_counter is set to true .uncached_data when not on Gitlab.com for secure combines license_scanning into license_management
 rspec './ee/spec/lib/ee/gitlab/usage_data_spec.rb[1:2:1:3:9:1]' # Gitlab::UsageData when the feature flag usage_ping_batch_counter is set to false .uncached_data when not on Gitlab.com for secure includes accurate usage_activity_by_stage data
 rspec './ee/spec/lib/ee/gitlab/usage_data_spec.rb[1:2:1:3:9:2]' # Gitlab::UsageData when the feature flag usage_ping_batch_counter is set to false .uncached_data when not on Gitlab.com for secure combines license_scanning into license_management
 SimpleCov failed with exit 1

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 6aeec7de succeeds

canceled the automatic merge

mentioned in issue #209027 (closed)

mentioned in commit 05c739cc

@stanhu This merge request could not automatically be picked into 12-9-auto-deploy-20200305 for 12.9.0-ee and will need manual intervention. You can either:

• Create a new MR targeting the source branch of 12-9-auto-deploy-20200305, and assign to release managers, or
• Solve the conflicts against 12-9-auto-deploy-20200305, and reassign the Pick into auto-deploy label to this merge request.

removed Pick into auto-deploy label

added workflowstaging label

added workflowcanary label and removed workflowstaging label

added workflowproduction label and removed workflowcanary label