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
however a block step creates implicit dependencies to the steps before and after it.
Context: Trying to make a block step only available after the steps that comb before.
Which dependencies (depends_on) are created implicitly isn't clear for instance if we have:
steps:
- key: a
- block
- key: b
There seems to be resulting 2 possibilities/interpretations:
block depends_on a, b depends_on block
b depends_on [a, block]
The difference is that in 1. we can't unblock until a finished, in 2. we can unblock before a finishes. I believe the current behavior is 2. because block steps can be unblocked before previous steps finish.
To get behavior 1. I think this does it:
steps:
- key: a
- block
depends_on: a
- key: b
Can you confirm is this is correct? Also if that's the case it can you update the doc to make this more obvious maybe include something like the second example here? It would remove some guess work getting block steps to work in different use cases.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Concerning https://buildkite.com/docs/pipelines/block-step, the description of the block step feels ambiguous and could be clarified, especially this part:
Context: Trying to make a block step only available after the steps that comb before.
Which dependencies (
depends_on
) are created implicitly isn't clear for instance if we have:There seems to be resulting 2 possibilities/interpretations:
The difference is that in 1. we can't unblock until a finished, in 2. we can unblock before a finishes. I believe the current behavior is 2. because block steps can be unblocked before previous steps finish.
To get behavior 1. I think this does it:
Can you confirm is this is correct? Also if that's the case it can you update the doc to make this more obvious maybe include something like the second example here? It would remove some guess work getting block steps to work in different use cases.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: