Re: pulsarbot

2020-02-13 Thread Devin Bost
This is awesome! -- Devin G. Bost On Thu, Feb 13, 2020 at 7:03 PM PengHui Li wrote: > Great! 👍 > On Feb 14, 2020, 08:43 +0800, Sijie Guo , wrote: > > Sorry for the late update here. INFRA just set up the TOKEN correctly for > > us. > > > > So the `pulsarbot` is working as expected now. You can

Re: pulsarbot

2020-02-13 Thread PengHui Li
Great! 👍 On Feb 14, 2020, 08:43 +0800, Sijie Guo , wrote: > Sorry for the late update here. INFRA just set up the TOKEN correctly for > us. > > So the `pulsarbot` is working as expected now. You can re-run the failed > checks by commenting `/pulsarbot run-failure-checks`. > > For more commands, you

Re: pulsarbot

2020-02-13 Thread Sijie Guo
Sorry for the late update here. INFRA just set up the TOKEN correctly for us. So the `pulsarbot` is working as expected now. You can re-run the failed checks by commenting `/pulsarbot run-failure-checks`. For more commands, you can refer https://github.com/apache/pulsar-test-infra/blob/master/pul

Re: pulsarbot

2020-02-05 Thread Enrico Olivelli
Very interesting. I left a comment on a merged PR (#3). Scripts do not have ASF license header. Not a big deal because we will never "release" them. It would be awesome to backport to BookKeeper once we are stable here in Pulsar Thanks Enrico Il giorno mer 5 feb 2020 alle ore 16:06 Devin Bost

Re: pulsarbot

2020-02-05 Thread Devin Bost
Sijie, Thanks for working on this! -- Devin G. Bost On Wed, Feb 5, 2020, 12:54 AM Sijie Guo wrote: > Hi all, > > After we moved CI from Jenkins to Github Actions, only committers have the > ability to trigger re-running the failed checks. It is inconvenient for > contributors. > > As you might