Trigger packit only for specific package in monorepo #2850

betulependule · 2025-09-22T07:51:27Z

Packit-service now supports the --package parameter in PR comments to specify package for which to run jobs. One test was added to test the functionality of this argument. As argparse is now used to parse comments, a collection of tests has also been added to test the functionality of the parsers.

TODO:

Update or write new documentation in packit/packit.dev.

There is some commented monorepo-related code in process_fedora_ci_jobs. It's not used, but might be useful in future.

Fixes #2467

Related to

Merge before #1073

RELEASE NOTES BEGIN

Packit-service now supports the --package parameter, which can be used when retriggering jobs in monorepositories. The parameter is intended to specify the package, for which to run specified jobs.

RELEASE NOTES END

sentry · 2025-09-22T07:51:46Z

🔍 Existing Issues For Review

Your pull request is modifying functions with the following pre-existing issues:

📄 File: packit_service/worker/jobs.py

Function	Unhandled Issue
`get_handlers_for_comment_and_rerun_event`	GitlabAPIException: 404: 404 Not found task.steve... `Event Count:` 1

_{Did you find this useful? React with a 👍 or 👎}

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-09-22T07:55:59Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/03f9963d40b448dc922e592654d8d45b

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 53s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 47s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-09-25T09:01:33Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/4752827fdcfa4371bb6fc0abcbd19a67

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 58s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 35s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-02T09:05:08Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/fabb7db32dee471cb220fea364852040

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 55s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 46s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-02T10:05:11Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/0b91fdef1762429f9e0acbcf4d57678c

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 2m 03s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 36s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-03T08:37:27Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/a4891bddc43249a7bebc3f50dc13b5fa

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 58s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 58s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-03T08:49:46Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/9e133aad1e044561a61498f76ac64175

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 50s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 4m 22s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-03T09:07:16Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/557159d14fd0490d8dd60e4e7d6f61c4

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 53s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 4m 13s

mfocko

Overall LGTM, mostly formatting remarks… there's also one thing with the common options shared at the top-level, but I might be wrong there 👀

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

mfocko · 2025-10-06T09:33:46Z

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

+    parser.add_argument("--all-branches", action="store_true")
+    parser.add_argument("--with-pr-config", action="store_true")
+    parser.add_argument("--resolve-bug")


Those aren't common for all Packit commands, are they? 👀

I don't think it's an issue… though the question is what should happen when you use an option that's not supported by some command, e.g., --resolve-bug is definitely not supported by /packit build…

Probably error > silent-ignore, but not sure about it.

Yes, they aren't common for all commands. I think it should be fixed in the later commits, where I made a subparser for each command, so that these arguments are defined only for the commands that support them.

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

packit_service/utils.py

mfocko · 2025-10-06T10:17:42Z

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

        args = parser.parse_args(commands)
        return {"command": args.command, "monorepo_package": args.package}
-    except argparse.ArgumentError:
+    except SystemExit:


Exit? 👀 that's from the argparse I presume?

Yes, I was really surprised. I was expecting to get argparse.TypeError when the parser encountered an error, but the except argparse.TypeError clause got skipped when running tests and tests failed with SystemExit.

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-07T07:32:38Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/4c52480406744768952f09f76d8f3b11

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 2m 32s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 58s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-10-07T11:24:29Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/21e2d5e2025a48a898ef4e16498cbe00

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 49s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 33s

mfocko

LGTM, just one suggestion for a smaller improvement

packit_service/constants.py

packit_service/utils.py

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

betulependule · 2025-11-26T08:35:38Z

/gemini review

gemini-code-assist

Code Review

This pull request introduces support for a --package parameter in PR comments to target specific packages in a monorepo, using argparse for comment parsing. The implementation is solid, but I have a few suggestions to improve code clarity, maintainability, and correctness. Specifically, I've pointed out an incorrect type hint and docstring, some dead code that can be removed, and an opportunity to refactor duplicated code.

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

packit_service/utils.py

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T09:21:09Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/5ebc68e1b19b4ef6a9798b4dd844d1a2

❌ pre-commit FAILURE in 1m 44s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 22s

betulependule · 2025-11-26T09:32:52Z

/gemini review

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-26T09:35:42Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/bfb9667ea3744d2d8608c3826b3c9eb2

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 19s

betulependule · 2025-11-27T10:03:15Z

recheck

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-27T10:07:22Z

Build failed.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/22e4045905a64d4baeafb5dc5dbd2269

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 45s
❌ packit-service-tests FAILURE in 3m 28s

softwarefactory-project-zuul · 2025-11-27T10:29:04Z

Build succeeded.
https://softwarefactory-project.io/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/2a88af5bb2b44dd5a51f9c3473019e2f

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 45s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 19s

lbarcziova · 2026-01-09T08:58:06Z

hi @betulependule , is this ready for review?

betulependule · 2026-01-12T08:31:27Z

hi @betulependule , is this ready for review?

Hi, yes, it should be.

mfocko

Mostly stylistic (language, not even Python…), LGTM

packit_service/worker/jobs.py

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-15T08:29:37Z

Merge Failed.

This change or one of its cross-repo dependencies was unable to be automatically merged with the current state of its repository. Please rebase the change and upload a new patchset.
Warning:
Error merging github.com/packit/packit-service for 2850,a9b2dd975f3f7ca8f5875a9af0f760b472c45e78

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-15T08:45:15Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/d0fe3c200b8b4cc68b44f31750e95d46

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 49s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 27s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-15T10:35:38Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/b9ec0443b0284ba9b8eccbdc34cda894

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 48s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 26s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-15T11:00:21Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/db097f34f5a04f93bc996b59262b61ed

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 46s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 24s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-21T08:58:16Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/46c268f4520d4783b17da37425537505

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 44s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 27s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-21T09:02:32Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/b1fabed1969447788e712ae3599221a7

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 44s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 25s

mfocko

🚀

Packit-service now supports the `--package` parameter in PR comments to specify package for which to run jobs. One test was added to test this functionality. The argparse module is now used for parsing comments. By default, argparse seems to ignore newlines in the epilog string used when generating help message, resulting in a messy help message. RawTextHelpFormatter ensures the message (specifically, the epilog part) is formatted properly. This going to be needed when argparse is utilized by `/packit help` command in the future. A collection of simple tests were also added to test the comment parsers.

In previous implementation, using the `--package` parameter in a non-monorepo project would result in this parameter being ignored no matter the value given. With this new approach, using the `--package` parameter incorrectly in a non-monorepo project will result in all jobs being filtered out instead. Co-authored-by: gemini-code-assist[bot] <176961590+gemini-code-assist[bot]@users.noreply.github.com>

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-21T10:22:49Z

Build succeeded.
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/b3c54109fc3e4a259fd89e6941d6cfc4

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 45s
✔️ packit-service-tests SUCCESS in 3m 22s

centosinfra-prod-github-app · 2026-01-21T10:27:29Z

Build succeeded (gate pipeline).
https://gateway-cloud-softwarefactory.apps.ocp.cloud.ci.centos.org/zuul/t/packit-service/buildset/fb14c7293f6e49f78507d70a5643817f

✔️ pre-commit SUCCESS in 1m 47s

betulependule marked this pull request as ready for review September 23, 2025 08:18

betulependule requested a review from a team as a code owner September 23, 2025 08:18

usercont-release-bot added this to Packit Kanban Board Sep 25, 2025

github-project-automation bot moved this to new in Packit Kanban Board Sep 25, 2025

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from d09f661 to 20aa8b5 Compare October 2, 2025 09:00

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 3f4d48e to 9d9bb32 Compare October 2, 2025 10:00

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 9d9bb32 to 8bf7bb0 Compare October 3, 2025 08:32

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from eb79df6 to 59420ee Compare October 3, 2025 09:02

betulependule mentioned this pull request Oct 6, 2025

Add GitPullRequestHelpHandler class #2853

Draft

2 tasks

TomasTomecek assigned mfocko Oct 6, 2025

mfocko reviewed Oct 6, 2025

View reviewed changes

betulependule requested a review from mfocko October 17, 2025 08:12

mfocko reviewed Nov 4, 2025

View reviewed changes

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 11026b5 to 769378a Compare November 5, 2025 08:55

gemini-code-assist bot reviewed Nov 26, 2025

View reviewed changes

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/utils.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 769378a to 108df99 Compare November 26, 2025 09:15

lbarcziova added this to Packit pull requests Jan 9, 2026

github-project-automation bot moved this to New in Packit pull requests Jan 9, 2026

mfocko approved these changes Jan 14, 2026

View reviewed changes

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

packit_service/worker/jobs.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lbarcziova moved this from New to In review in Packit pull requests Jan 14, 2026

betulependule requested review from lbarcziova and nforro as code owners January 15, 2026 08:29

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from a9b2dd9 to d998e63 Compare January 15, 2026 08:41

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from d998e63 to 8fc54de Compare January 15, 2026 10:31

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 8fc54de to 04a71b5 Compare January 15, 2026 10:56

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 25786a9 to 69b6943 Compare January 21, 2026 08:58

mfocko approved these changes Jan 21, 2026

View reviewed changes

betulependule and others added 2 commits January 21, 2026 11:16

betulependule force-pushed the comment-monorepo-argument branch from 69b6943 to 94d8adf Compare January 21, 2026 10:18

betulependule added the mergeit Merge via Zuul label Jan 21, 2026

centosinfra-prod-github-app bot merged commit e7b4fe7 into packit:main Jan 21, 2026
7 checks passed

github-project-automation bot moved this from In review to Done in Packit pull requests Jan 21, 2026

Trigger packit only for specific package in monorepo #2850

Trigger packit only for specific package in monorepo #2850

Uh oh!

Conversation

betulependule commented Sep 22, 2025 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

sentry bot commented Sep 22, 2025

🔍 Existing Issues For Review

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Sep 22, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Sep 25, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 2, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 2, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 3, 2025

Uh oh!

mfocko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mfocko Oct 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

mfocko Oct 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

betulependule Oct 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

mfocko Oct 6, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

betulependule Oct 7, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Oct 7, 2025

Uh oh!

mfocko left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

gemini-code-assist bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Code Review

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

softwarefactory-project-zuul bot commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Nov 26, 2025

Uh oh!

betulependule commented Sep 22, 2025 •

edited

Loading