Skip to content

tools: keep multi-commit PRs in the commit queue - #65386

Closed
anonrig wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:mainfrom
anonrig:cursor/keep-multicommit-prs-in-cq-433e
Closed

tools: keep multi-commit PRs in the commit queue#65386
anonrig wants to merge 1 commit into
nodejs:mainfrom
anonrig:cursor/keep-multicommit-prs-in-cq-433e

Conversation

@anonrig

@anonrig anonrig commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Ready pull requests with more than one commit and neither commit-queue-squash nor commit-queue-rebase were landed with --oneCommitMax. git node land applied the patches, then refused to finish and asked for one of those labels. The queue treated that as a hard failure and replaced commit-queue with commit-queue-failed.

That is what just happened to #65324, which was otherwise ready (approvals, GitHub CI, Jenkins CI).

This change:

  • skips those pull requests in the metadata filter so the landing job does not check out and rebase them
  • comments once asking for commit-queue-squash or commit-queue-rebase
  • keeps the commit-queue label so a later run can land the PR after a label is added
  • treats the same git node land refusal as a skip if it still happens

The commit queue itself is running. Recent successes include #64532. PRs younger than the 48-hour multi-approval wait, or with only one approval (7-day wait), are still skipped on wait time as before.

Refs: #65324

Ready pull requests with more than one commit and no
commit-queue-squash or commit-queue-rebase label were landed with
--oneCommitMax. git node land then refused to finish and the queue
replaced commit-queue with commit-queue-failed.

Skip those pull requests in the metadata filter and landing script,
leave a one-time comment asking for a policy label, and keep them
in the queue.

Signed-off-by: Yagiz Nizipli <yagiz@nizipli.com>
@nodejs-github-bot

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Review requested:

  • @nodejs/actions
  • @nodejs/tsc

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory. labels Aug 18, 2026
@aduh95

aduh95 commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What's the upside? That seems like adding complexity for no benefits

@panva

panva commented Aug 18, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

What's the point? I'm looking at #65324 and find nothing out of the ordinary in how CQ was processed.

#65324 (comment)

CQ wasn't broken, it was waiting for 48 hours as the minimum without fast-track and then failed because of missing policy squash/rebase instruction. Leaving it in the queue would eat up rate limits on every subsequent run.

The failure comment could be improved - yes.

@anonrig anonrig closed this Aug 18, 2026
@anonrig
anonrig deleted the cursor/keep-multicommit-prs-in-cq-433e branch August 18, 2026 16:32
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. tools Issues and PRs related to the tools directory.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants