Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Docs: Checking links makes check-docs target brittle #4732

Closed
matej-g opened this issue Oct 4, 2021 · 11 comments
Closed

Docs: Checking links makes check-docs target brittle #4732

matej-g opened this issue Oct 4, 2021 · 11 comments

Comments

@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator

matej-g commented Oct 4, 2021

Despite the measures to ignore some problematic links via config, I'm still seeing quite a few failures (e.g. the latest here https://github.com/thanos-io/thanos/pull/4726/checks?check_run_id=3790681280).

I'm wondering how reasonable it is to check availability of all links the different links from documentation, since these are various external resource and even if just one of them cannot be momentarily reached, the tests are failing. This increases the potential for test failures significantly.

@saswatamcode
Copy link
Member

Yes. This is problematic, especially due to 0 status code errors like this. Retries for this were added to mdox but it still fails in some cases.

Currently, mdox checks all links (except config ones) on each PR and push to main. For this purpose, we're planning to add persistent caching to mdox using SQLite! So once checked, the links would be cached in GitHub Actions and would only be checked again after a specific time period (for eg, ~5d). This should reduce such failures and save time & resources. 🙂

@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator Author

matej-g commented Oct 5, 2021

Awesome! Sounds like a cool solution 👍

@bwplotka
Copy link
Member

bwplotka commented Oct 5, 2021

👍🏽

@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Jan 9, 2022

Hello 👋 Looks like there was no activity on this issue for the last two months.
Do you mind updating us on the status? Is this still reproducible or needed? If yes, just comment on this PR or push a commit. Thanks! 🤗
If there will be no activity in the next two weeks, this issue will be closed (we can always reopen an issue if we need!). Alternatively, use remind command if you wish to be reminded at some point in future.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Jan 9, 2022
@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator Author

matej-g commented Jan 10, 2022

I think this is still needed, did you get a chance to take a look @saswatamcode? Any way I could support you?

@stale stale bot removed the stale label Jan 10, 2022
@saswatamcode
Copy link
Member

Yes, the cache PR still needs to be reviewed once, so if you can find the time to do so, that'd be great! It can then be merged when @bwplotka is back! 🙂

@Nexucis Nexucis mentioned this issue Feb 17, 2022
2 tasks
@stale
Copy link

stale bot commented Apr 17, 2022

Hello 👋 Looks like there was no activity on this issue for the last two months.
Do you mind updating us on the status? Is this still reproducible or needed? If yes, just comment on this PR or push a commit. Thanks! 🤗
If there will be no activity in the next two weeks, this issue will be closed (we can always reopen an issue if we need!). Alternatively, use remind command if you wish to be reminded at some point in future.

@stale stale bot added the stale label Apr 17, 2022
@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator Author

matej-g commented Apr 19, 2022

Still relevant! I pinged @bwplotka to merge the upstream PR, after that nothing should be blocking us here :godmode:

@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator Author

matej-g commented Jul 13, 2022

The upstream feature has been merged 🎉 and @douglascamata graciously agreed to bring the new mdox release over to Thanos, which should resolve this 💪

@douglascamata
Copy link
Contributor

Draft PR: #5500

@matej-g
Copy link
Collaborator Author

matej-g commented Jul 14, 2022

Nice job @douglascamata 💯, resolved via #5500

@matej-g matej-g closed this as completed Jul 14, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants