Uploaded image for project: 'Bitbucket Data Center'
  1. Bitbucket Data Center
  2. BSERV-3203

Automatically or Manually remove Running builds from Pull Requests if build is missed

XMLWordPrintable

    • Icon: Suggestion Suggestion
    • Resolution: Unresolved
    • None
    • None
    • None
    • 26
    • 4
    • We collect Bitbucket feedback from various sources, and we evaluate what we've collected when planning our product roadmap. To understand how this piece of feedback will be reviewed, see our Implementation of New Features Policy.

      If build hung up, or network error, Stash will always contains builds in Pull Request in Running state. No way to remove them from it.

      This disables Pull Request merging if you enables "Requires for 1 success build" in settings.

      Stash must have ping Builds, if no pings from CI for Running state build since last hour, then build may be ignored or removed.

          Form Name

            [BSERV-3203] Automatically or Manually remove Running builds from Pull Requests if build is missed

            Ádám Zovits added a comment - - edited

            An idea that would be easier to implement than pings: if there is a newer build than the hung (interpret as "in progess" since for example, more than ten times as long as it took for the last terminated build to complete) one, remove the older and keep the newer instead - be it failure or success.

            Ádám Zovits added a comment - - edited An idea that would be easier to implement than pings: if there is a newer build than the hung (interpret as "in progess" since for example, more than ten times as long as it took for the last terminated build to complete) one, remove the older and keep the newer instead - be it failure or success.

            Linux Admin added a comment -

            Will this be fixed before Fast and Furious 12?

            Linux Admin added a comment - Will this be fixed before Fast and Furious 12?

            Bill Goodrich added a comment -

            This is a bug. Deleting the build from Bamboo, doesn't fix this issue.

            Bill Goodrich added a comment - This is a bug. Deleting the build from Bamboo, doesn't fix this issue.

            pezzi added a comment -

            Almost 10 years... lol

            pezzi added a comment - Almost 10 years... lol

            Stephen Fry added a comment -

            Would really support this.

            Stephen Fry added a comment - Would really support this.

            Vipin Kumar mishra added a comment -

            Even we are stuck where in on every pull request it show that two build are running but on backed is only one. Now one request gets successful where in other keeps running in progress because of which we are not able to merge the code.

            Vipin Kumar mishra added a comment - Even we are stuck where in on every pull request it show that two build are running but on backed is only one. Now one request gets successful where in other keeps running in progress because of which we are not able to merge the code.

            Bhargavi Chintapalli added a comment -

            we are blocked with this issue, any workaround?

            Bhargavi Chintapalli added a comment - we are blocked with this issue, any workaround?

            emdepl added a comment -

            Up. We need this too 

            emdepl added a comment - Up. We need this too 

            Christien Lomax added a comment -

            This is also causing issues for us.  every now and then a build that passes for some reason does not get seen by BitBucket. 

            Instead it keeps saying the build is in progress.  As we have a merge check in place for successful builds, it blocks merges, even after we've successfully re-built.  It would be great if either we could manually remove the older build OR if it would just use the latest build's status.

            This has occurred multiple times, and typically requires an admin to go in and disable the merge check to allow the merge, then re-enable afterwards (or re-create the branch effected and re-build, killing the old branch).   

            This causes frustration for our developers who are help up while they create a ticket asking for the change, wait for an admin resource, etc.  Our policies around merge checks are quite strict (on purpose).

            This ticket has been open for 9 years...

            Christien Lomax added a comment - This is also causing issues for us.  every now and then a build that passes for some reason does not get seen by BitBucket.  Instead it keeps saying the build is in progress.  As we have a merge check in place for successful builds, it blocks merges, even after we've successfully re-built.  It would be great if either we could manually remove the older build OR if it would just use the latest build's status. This has occurred multiple times, and typically requires an admin to go in and disable the merge check to allow the merge, then re-enable afterwards (or re-create the branch effected and re-build, killing the old branch).    This causes frustration for our developers who are help up while they create a ticket asking for the change, wait for an admin resource, etc.  Our policies around merge checks are quite strict (on purpose). This ticket has been open for 9 years...

            Prashant added a comment -

            Still happening.

            Prashant added a comment - Still happening.

              Unassigned Unassigned
              3652ed9ede2e Alexey Efimov
              Votes:
              104 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              54 Start watching this issue

                Created:
                Updated: