This ensures we do not miss events. E.g.
before:
t0: hash changes to X
t1: send webhook(X), waiting for response
t2: hash changes to Y
t3: queue next webhook(Y) but can't send because previous is not done
t4: crash
t5: restart
t6: find repo at hash Y
no webhook(Y) was sent.
after:
t0: hash changes to X
t1: send webhook(X), waiting for response
t2: hash changes to Y
t3: queue next webhook(Y) but can't send because previous is not done
t4: crash
t5: restart
t6: find repo at hash Y
t7: send webhook(Y), waiting for response
This is a breaking change. The `--change-permissions` flag was too
coarse (e.g. changed directories and files alike) and not expressive (no
way to say "g+w").
I doubt if anyone was using it, and if they were, the new
`--group-write` is almost certainly what they want.
To do this, we run the e2e test as a different user. To do that, we
need git-sync to make sure that everything is group accessible. To
clean up after the test, we need everything to be group writable. To do
that, we add a new flag: `--group-write`.
The previous (v3) sync loop betrays my lack of understanding about git.
It tried to codify my archaic mental model (e.g. --branch and --rev
being disting things) and was ultimately a patchwork of corner-cases
evolved over a few years.
This commit is less of a "diff" and more of a "rewrite".
The new logic is simpler and more efficient. It does not `git clone`
ever. It does not differentiate the first sync from subsequent syncs.
It uses `git fetch` to get the exact SHA and then makes a worktree from
that.
The new `--ref` flag replaces both `--rev` and `--branch`, though it
will use those if specified. In fact, almost all of the e2e tests
passed without change - using --ref and --branch!
I will follow this commit up with more cleanups and e2es.
Thanks, bash, for supporting `<` and `>` and making them NOT mean the
obvious thing.
This shows up when you set RUNS=10:
`[[ 2 < 10 ]]` is false
`(( 2 < 10 ))` is true
Tim Hockin
Kubernetes Prow Robot
Sacha Viscaino