On 2014-08-21 16:17:05 -0700 (-0700), James E. Blair wrote:
> Jobs in the Gearman queue are definitely supposed to be canceled; if
> not, that's a bug (and not a known one).
It's not behavior I'd seen since some time last year, and while I
remember it was fairly non-obvious when we spotted it I do
Jeremy Stanley writes:
> On 2014-08-21 15:11:13 -0700 (-0700), James E. Blair wrote:
> [...]
>> Strictly speaking, that will mean that every patchset will go through
>> the merger and Jenkins. But if testing for a patchset is in progress
>> when a new patchset is uploaded, the tests will abort.
On 2014-08-21 15:11:13 -0700 (-0700), James E. Blair wrote:
[...]
> Strictly speaking, that will mean that every patchset will go through
> the merger and Jenkins. But if testing for a patchset is in progress
> when a new patchset is uploaded, the tests will abort.
[...]
One corner case I think w
"trinath.soman...@freescale.com" writes:
> Hi-
>
> I configured Zuul with paramater, 'dequeue-on-new-patchset: true'.
>
> With this, for a change, if multiple patchsets are in queue, only the latest
> must be taken and rest all to be ignored.
>
> But I noticed that every patchset is going to zuu
