Skip to content

Force an exhaustive run on windows 2016 - #19484

Open
donoghuc wants to merge 1 commit into
elastic:mainfrom
donoghuc:force-windows-2016
Open

donoghuc wants to merge 1 commit into
elastic:mainfrom
donoghuc:force-windows-2016

Conversation

@donoghuc

@donoghuc donoghuc commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 4, 2026 16:01
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🤖 GitHub comments

Just comment with:

  • run docs-build : Re-trigger the docs validation. (use unformatted text in the comment!)
  • run exhaustive tests : Run the exhaustive tests Buildkite pipeline.

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

🟢 Approval recommended

The change is narrowly scoped to CI VM selection and does not introduce functional code changes, with only a minor documentation clarification suggested in review comments.

Pull request overview

This PR updates the Buildkite exhaustive-test VM image selection to force Windows compatibility jobs to run on Windows Server 2016 by constraining the windows image list to a single entry.

Changes:

  • Restricts the Windows VM image selection list to windows-2016 in the shared VM images manifest used by the exhaustive-tests step generator.
File summaries
File Description
.buildkite/scripts/common/vm-images.json Pins the Windows image list to windows-2016 so randomized/exhaustive Windows jobs always select that OS.
Review details
  • Files reviewed: 1/1 changed files
  • Comments generated: 1
  • Review effort level: Lite

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

"opensuse": ["opensuse-leap-15"]
},
"windows": ["windows-2025", "windows-2022", "windows-2019", "windows-2016"]
"windows": ["windows-2016"]
@donoghuc

donoghuc commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

run exhaustive tests

@mergify

mergify Bot commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This pull request does not have a backport label. Could you fix it @donoghuc? 🙏
To fixup this pull request, you need to add the backport labels for the needed
branches, such as:

  • backport-8./d is the label to automatically backport to the 8./d branch. /d is the digit.
  • If no backport is necessary, please add the backport-skip label

@donoghuc

donoghuc commented Sep 4, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

Moving the discussion here #19483 (comment) to this to focus in on the problem. I want to make sure its clear that this was an issue outside the resolv bump pr.

cc @andsel

@infra-vault-gh-plugin-prod

Copy link
Copy Markdown

💛 Build succeeded, but was flaky

Failed CI Steps

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants