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
I think update:execute should not return the same exit code as a failed update. I think this has been recently implemented since recently our deployment process crashes since update:execute now returns a non-0 exit code if there are no updates.
Arguably, it should return a dedicated exit code (eg. 2) so you can differentiate between failed or no updates. If a dedicated exit code is not possible, it should return 0 in my opinion; not updating Drupal does not mean it failed. Let us discuss.
Edit: Also, I'd suggest that "error" message is reduced to a "warning". My colleagues are startled by the big red error message while deploying new versions of projects. update:execute is part of our deployment process, regardless if there are new updates, in that case it feels wrong to show errors; nothing's gone wrong.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
I think
update:execute
should not return the same exit code as a failed update. I think this has been recently implemented since recently our deployment process crashes sinceupdate:execute
now returns a non-0 exit code if there are no updates.Arguably, it should return a dedicated exit code (eg.
2
) so you can differentiate between failed or no updates. If a dedicated exit code is not possible, it should return0
in my opinion; not updating Drupal does not mean it failed. Let us discuss.Edit: Also, I'd suggest that "error" message is reduced to a "warning". My colleagues are startled by the big red error message while deploying new versions of projects.
update:execute
is part of our deployment process, regardless if there are new updates, in that case it feels wrong to show errors; nothing's gone wrong.The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: