- Issue created by @spokje
- Status changed to Needs review
over 1 year ago 12:32pm 9 April 2023 The last submitted patch, 2: InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest_testPrivateFiles-no_#3350972-1500x-should_fail.patch, failed testing. View results →
- Status changed to RTBC
over 1 year ago 7:50am 10 April 2023 - 🇳🇱Netherlands spokje
Indeed, but every silver lining needs a cloud: By the looks of it, we should be able to unskip all/a lot of Layout Builder JS tests, which will add somewhere around 5 minutes to a full test run by my estimates.
The last submitted patch, 2: InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest_testPrivateFiles-no_#3350972-1500x-should_fail.patch, failed testing. View results →
The last submitted patch, 2: InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest_testPrivateFiles-no_#3350972-1500x-should_fail.patch, failed testing. View results →
- Assigned to spokje
- Status changed to Needs work
over 1 year ago 10:36am 10 April 2023 - Issue was unassigned.
- Status changed to RTBC
over 1 year ago 11:39am 10 April 2023 - 🇳🇱Netherlands spokje
Both should_fail and non_fail patch run 5 times. That's 7500 individual tests
per patch.Back to RTBC.
- Status changed to Fixed
over 1 year ago 12:03pm 10 April 2023 - 🇬🇧United Kingdom catch
Alright one thing at a time!
Committed/pushed to 10.1.x, thanks!
Since we're going to try to commit one of these per day, skipping the backport for now, let's see how everything works together first (if at all, we could also just leave them skipped in earlier branches).
- Status changed to Downport
over 1 year ago 5:32pm 10 April 2023 - 🇬🇧United Kingdom catch
Just did a follow-up commit for this:
diff --git a/core/modules/layout_builder/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest.php b/core/modules/layout_builder/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest.php index 6e491cc97b..95f213ac93 100644 --- a/core/modules/layout_builder/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest.php +++ b/core/modules/layout_builder/tests/src/FunctionalJavascript/InlineBlockPrivateFilesTest.php @@ -62,7 +62,6 @@ protected function setUp(): void { * Tests access to private files added to inline blocks in the layout builder. */ public function testPrivateFiles() { - // Skipped due to frequent random test failures. $assert_session = $this->assertSession(); LayoutBuilderEntityViewDisplay::load('node.bundle_with_section_field.default') ->enableLayoutBuilder()
- Status changed to Needs review
over 1 year ago 12:51pm 11 April 2023 - 🇮🇳India gauravvvv Delhi, India
I have provided Patch for 9.4.x. please review
- Status changed to Downport
over 1 year ago 11:50pm 11 April 2023 - Status changed to Fixed
over 1 year ago 9:03pm 13 April 2023 - 🇺🇸United States xjm
@smustgrave Because these random failures also impair the security advisory process, which is currently provided back to 9.4.x.
- 🇳🇱Netherlands spokje
Are we sure we want to mark this as fixed?
Doesn't seem it has landed anywhere else but in 10.1.x. - 🇬🇧United Kingdom catch
Yes this still need backport, but the original commit should cherry-pick I think.
- Status changed to Downport
over 1 year ago 4:34pm 19 April 2023 - 🇺🇸United States xjm
Sorry, had the issue open in two tabs and crossposted.
Removing credit for the unnecessary backport patch.
- Status changed to Fixed
over 1 year ago 9:30am 24 April 2023 - 🇬🇧United Kingdom catch
I agree with backporting the original bugfix back to 9.4.x since that will fix random test failures there. With these patches though we're only unskipping previously-skipped tests, some/most of which were only skipped in the first place in 9.5.x or later, so I think it's better to stop at 9.5. We wouldn't backport new test coverage to 9.4.x at this point and this is similar.
I want to get this round of fixes all in since it's taken weeks to commit them 12-24 hours apart in 10.1.x, so going ahead with the cherry-picks to 10.0.x and 9.5.x but leaving there. @xjm if you strongly think they should go back to 9.4.x too please re-open although also we should double check they're skipped in the first place on that branch.
Made the changes directly in the 10.0.x branch since there were two commits on this issue and cherry-picked that commit to 9.5.x, thanks all!
Automatically closed - issue fixed for 2 weeks with no activity.