Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
September 22, 2020, 10:11pm
1
versions used: SonarQube-8.4.2 D.E., Sonar Plugins:
$ ls -1 $SONARQUBE_HOME/extensions/plugins
backelite-sonar-swift-plugin-0.4.6.jar
checkstyle-sonar-plugin-4.29.jar
java-i18n-rules-0.1.0.jar
README.txt
sonar-cobertura-plugin-2.0.jar
sonar-csharp-plugin-8.1.0.13383.jar
sonar-css-plugin-1.1.1.1010.jar
sonar-findbugs-plugin-3.11.1.jar
sonar-flex-plugin-2.5.1.1831.jar
sonar-go-plugin-1.6.0.719.jar
sonar-groovy-plugin-1.6.jar
sonar-html-plugin-3.2.0.2082.jar
sonar-jacoco-plugin-1.1.0.898.jar
sonar-java-plugin-6.3.2.22818.jar
sonar-javascript-plugin-6.2.0.12043.jar
sonar-kotlin-plugin-1.5.0.315.jar
sonar-php-plugin-3.3.0.5166.jar
sonar-pmd-plugin-3.2.1.jar
sonar-python-plugin-2.5.0.5733.jar
sonar-ruby-plugin-1.5.0.315.jar
sonar-scala-plugin-1.5.0.315.jar
sonar-scm-git-plugin-1.9.1.1834.jar
sonar-scm-svn-plugin-1.9.0.1295.jar
sonar-softvis3d-plugin-1.1.0.jar
sonar-typescript-plugin-2.1.0.4359.jar
sonar-vbnet-plugin-8.1.0.13383.jar
sonar-webdriver-plugin-1.0.5.jar
sonar-xml-plugin-2.0.1.2020.jar
sonar-yaml-plugin-1.5.1.jar
error observed
Project analyzed displays error message:
No indications of any issues in ce.log:
ce_udf-model-schema.log (8.2 KB)
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
September 23, 2020, 6:40pm
3
GitHub
Sorry, I cannot provide a repeatable example project.
Hi @Jaff ,
Do you mind being more explicit about your report? Did the PR decoration actually worked?
I’ve noticed Pull Request decoration | status=SUCCESS
in the log, hence my question.
Cheers
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
September 25, 2020, 11:04pm
6
Philippe,
Yes. PR decoration was visible in the GitHub page:
Warning still displays on the analysis page.
Can you provide us with a view of this project settings, especially the Pull request decoration tab? I’m mainly interested by the value of the Repository identifier field.
As mentioned in the warning message, I think your Repository identifier should contains the organization slug too: org/rpo .
This is also mentioned here:
What’s weird to me is that I would expect the PR decoration to fail without the proper repository identifier. I’ll dig a bit further.
Hi @Jaff , I’ve tried to reproduce and the PR decoration definitely can’t work without the organization slug being part of the repository identifier.
Could you fix the repository identifier and keep us inform on how it impacted your PR decoration?
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
October 21, 2020, 5:17pm
13
Those settings are definitely present; although sometimes on first analysis of a new project they are absent, I have observed. What might be the solution for that situation?
Hi @Jaff ,
I’ll need you to be more precise in your answers otherwise I won’t be able to help.
Did you add the repository slug to the repository identifier field?
Did you notice something different with the PR decoration? What does the details of the SonarQube Code Analysis check look like on Github?
Do you still see the initial analysis warning in SonarQube?
Cheers
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
October 28, 2020, 12:13am
15
Hi,
To answer your questions:
Did you add the repository slug to the repository identifier field?
Yes, this detail is present in the configuration
Did you notice something different with the PR decoration? What does the details of the SonarQube Code Analysis check look like on Github?
Do you still see the initial analysis warning in SonarQube?
Yes, but it turns out the configuration settings were wrong, so I’ll try running it again
Here is result:
From ce.log:
2020.10.28 00:28:24 INFO ce[AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc][o.s.c.t.p.a.p.PostProjectAnalysisTasksExecutor] Webhooks | globalWebhooks=0 | projectWebhooks=0 | status=SUCCESS | time=5ms
2020.10.28 00:28:26 WARN ce[AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc][c.s.C.D.E.M] Failed to create comment. Please check GitHub Application for write access to pull requests. \n{“message”:“Resource not accessible by integration”,“documentation_url”:“https://docs.github.com/rest/reference/issues#create-an-issue-comment ”}
2020.10.28 00:28:26 INFO ce[AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc][o.s.c.t.p.a.p.PostProjectAnalysisTasksExecutor] Pull Request decoration | status=SUCCESS | time=2253ms
2020.10.28 00:28:26 INFO ce[AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc][o.s.c.t.CeWorkerImpl] Executed task | project=com.tivo.danube.model.udf:danube-model-udf | type=REPORT | pullRequest=167 | id=AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc | submitter=sonar | status=SUCCESS | time=2874ms
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
October 28, 2020, 2:52am
16
This is the correct setting, in response to your question from September 26:
Well I suppose the logs you posted are a good way to troubleshoot additional warnings:
2020.10.28 00:28:26 WARN ce[AXVsmxCwbW42HO9FIvLc][c.s.C.D.E.M] Failed to create comment. Please check GitHub Application for write access to pull requests.
=> https://docs.sonarqube.org/latest/analysis/pr-decoration/#header-1
FYI - Logs have been improved in SonarQube 8.5 (See this ticket ). You might want consider upgrading to it at some point to better understand what’s going on.
Jaff
(Mark Jaffe)
November 12, 2020, 6:56pm
18
Thanks, upgrade to 8.5.1 was done last Friday; situation improved, as we no longer seeing the warning
system
(system)
Closed
November 19, 2020, 6:56pm
19
This topic was automatically closed 7 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.