Weird bug in Calculate Changelog behavior

14 views
Skip to first unread message

jbr...@snapapp.com

unread,
Dec 21, 2017, 6:23:25 PM12/21/17
to Jenkins Users
Hi all-

I'm using the "Calculate Changelog Against a Specific Branch" additional behavior, and I've used the GIT_PREVIOUS_SUCCESSFUL_COMMIT env variable. However, I'm getting this error in my build:

Using 'Changelog to branch' strategy.
fatal: bad revision '^origin/$GIT_PREVIOUS_SUCCESSFUL_COMMIT'
ERROR: Unable to retrieve changeset

I've attached a screenshot of the config. It's straightforward: use the origin repo, and use a variable. Why isn't this field interpolating the variable? (I've tried other variables- it just doesn't seem to respect variables at all, regardless of whether I have braces around them or not.)

Cheers,
Jack
Screen Shot 2017-12-21 at 18.21.29.png

Mark Waite

unread,
Dec 21, 2017, 6:59:57 PM12/21/17
to jenkins...@googlegroups.com
I suspect it is not interpreting that variable because variable expansion is not implemented for that field.  I suspect the original author did not consider variable expansion in handling that field.

I think that is a novel use of the field, asking it to compute changes since the last successful build.  I'm more accustomed to that field being used to define a common branch against which diffs are performed.

Mark Waite

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Jenkins Users" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to jenkinsci-use...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-users/80a97199-bece-45e6-afec-9ae3062d7aeb%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

jbr...@snapapp.com

unread,
Dec 21, 2017, 7:41:23 PM12/21/17
to Jenkins Users
Hmm, that's what I was afraid of! Darn my novel approaches! *shakes fist*

Yeah, I'm looking for a way to make sure that, for manual builds, I can still generate changelogs for branches. It's possible there's a more idiomatic way to do this and I'm just not aware of it.

Thanks!
Jack
Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages