You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
What happened:
For example, the following pipeline is executed once
After that, "first2" is disabled and restarted from "first1".
In the current specification, "second" is triggered by reference to the past status of "first2", despite first2 being disabled.
This specification seems a bit strange to me.
The user should assume that "second" jobs and subsequent jobs that have "second" job as a trigger will also not be triggered because of the fact that it is disabled.
What you expected to happen:
Do not refer to the past status of disabled job.
@yakanechi@kumada626 - after discussing with others, we feel that this is the right implementation for the case of restart. The second job is restarted as the downstream effect after first1 restarted and even though the first2 is now disabled, it had been previously run in the parent event. So we conclude this should be the expected behavior.
What happened:
For example, the following pipeline is executed once
After that, "first2" is disabled and restarted from "first1".
In the current specification, "second" is triggered by reference to the past status of "first2", despite first2 being disabled.
This specification seems a bit strange to me.
The user should assume that "second" jobs and subsequent jobs that have "second" job as a trigger will also not be triggered because of the fact that it is disabled.
What you expected to happen:
Do not refer to the past status of disabled job.
How to reproduce it:
<- Start, Resart ->
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: