Rename run group side bar to Re-executions instead of the job name #26359
Conversation
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. |
|
Deploy preview for dagit-core-storybook ready! ✅ Preview Built with commit 824cc28. |
| @@ -96,7 +96,7 @@ export const RunGroupPanel = ({ | |||
| }); | |||
|
|
|||
| return ( | |||
| <SidebarSection title={runs[0] ? `${runs[0].pipelineName} (${runs.length})` : ''}> | |||
| <SidebarSection title={runs[0] ? `Retries (${runs.length - 1})` : ''}> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What do you think of the update to the number that's shown next to the title? It's currently the number of runs in the run group, which contains the original run. Renaming the section to Retries makes me think the number should be the number of retries, not the total number of runs in the group. However, the list of runs in the section would be the whole run group, so maybe it's more confusing to have Retries (n) but then see n+1 runs in the list
There was a problem hiding this comment.
For consistency it might be best to match whatever is in the retries tag - which I believe in this case is n
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think it is weird to show a number and then have the number of things not match that number (the other lists just below it match the count of their description, e.g. Executing), but it is also weird to call it Retries and then have it not match the number of retries.
It's also maybe a little weird to say "Retries" when the run you're looking at is at the bottom of the stack? Since none of them will be retries of this run
is there a more clear way to say 'Run group'?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's also maybe a little weird to say "Retries" when the run you're looking at is at the bottom of the stack? Since none of them will be retries of this run
that's a good point
There was a problem hiding this comment.
spitballing:
- run lineage
- retry lineage
- retry group
There was a problem hiding this comment.
maybe worth a post in #eng-naming? "Run Lineage" seems ok to me
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@OwenKephart's "Re-executions" suggestion seems reasonable to me
jamiedemaria
force-pushed
the
jamie/rename-retry-sidebar
branch
from
d20ce6c to
824cc28
Compare
jamiedemaria
changed the title
…agster-io#26359) ## Summary & Motivation During dogfooding of some changes to retry logic, @anuthebananu pointed out that the title for the lineage of retried runs was a bit confusing. It's currently the name of the job, which for asset jobs leaks the internal `__ASSET_JOB` name <img width="630" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-09 at 3 01 30 PM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/8f5841b8-9ea7-4a14-93ec-d373dc8d56a8"> This PR renames it `Re-executions`. <img width="572" alt="Screenshot 2024-12-12 at 11 28 57 AM" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/43feabc3-febe-4573-8b33-9299c722bf4e" /> ## How I Tested These Changes ## Changelog Renamed the run lineage sidebar on the Run details page to `Re-executions`.
Summary & Motivation
During dogfooding of some changes to retry logic, @anuthebananu pointed out that the title for the lineage of retried runs was a bit confusing. It's currently the name of the job, which for asset jobs leaks the internal
__ASSET_JOBnameThis PR renames it
Re-executions.How I Tested These Changes
Changelog
Renamed the run lineage sidebar on the Run details page to
Re-executions.