edit-validation-sets refuses to create a new validation set at sequence 1 ("sequence number was not incremented")
Metadata
Current evaluation
edit-validation-sets rejects creating a brand-new validation set at sequence 1 because the sequence-increment check runs even when no existing set exists; confirmed by maintainer, tracked as SNAPCRAFT-1379.
Suggested action: close resolved
Reason: Maintainer mr-cal confirmed 'Snapcraft shouldn't use the sequence-incrementing code for new validation sets', and the related fix PR #6423 ('fix(validation-sets): don't validate new sets') was merged as commit e7b47adb7, which specifically unblocks creating a new validation set at sequence 1 on top of PR #6420 (for the sibling issue #6413). The report includes a precise root cause (validationsets.py::_validate_assertion comparing new_sequence <= old_sequence even when the GET returned 'Could not find an existing validation-set'), full logs and a workaround. Confidence is capped because repository inspection tools returned 'No pinned SHA available for project snapcraft', so I could not independently verify e7b47adb7 in the tree.
Evaluated by: mr-cal-bot
Issue body
Evaluation history
| Date | Model | Scores | Action | Summary |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| stealth/space-bunny-alpha |
Impact:
45
Quick Win:
30
Complexity:
25
Confidence:
75
Actionability:
88
|
close resolved | edit-validation-sets rejects creating a brand-new validation set at sequence 1 because the sequence-increment check runs even when no existing set exists; confirmed by maintainer, tracked as SNAPCRAFT-1379. | |
| stealth/space-bunny-alpha |
Impact:
55
Quick Win:
32
Complexity:
37
Confidence:
95
Actionability:
92
|
keep open | A confirmed bug blocks edit-validation-sets from creating a first validation set at sequence 1 by applying the existing-set increment check to new sets. Triaged under SNAPCRAFT-1379. | |
| qwen/qwen3.6-35b-a3b |
Impact:
50
Quick Win:
35
Staleness:
25
Complexity:
30
Confidence:
80
Support Request:
0
|
keep open | edit-validation-sets rejects creating new validation sets at sequence 1 due to incorrect sequence-increment validation. Triaged and confirmed by maintainer. | |
| qwen3.6-35b-a3b-mtp-q6 |
Impact:
65
Quick Win:
42
Staleness:
5
Complexity:
35
Confidence:
85
Support Request:
5
|
keep open | edit-validation-sets rejects creating new validation sets at sequence 1 due to a sequence-increment check that fires even when no prior set exists. Maintainer confirmed as bug. |
Update history
| Date | Change |
|---|---|
| updated | |
| updated | |
| created |
Related work
-
Likely Fixed By:
canonical/snapcraft#6423
(confidence 82%)
PR titled 'fix(validation-sets): don't validate new sets' landed as commit e7b47adb7 and is described as allowing new validation sets at sequence 1.
-
Related To:
canonical/snapcraft#6413
(confidence 80%)
Same validation-set sequence warning behaviour; fixed by merged PR #6420 which made the warning non-blocking, and #6423 builds on it.
-
Caused By:
canonical/snapcraft#5535
(confidence 55%)
PR #5535 introduced the non-incremented sequence warning that now fires incorrectly for newly created validation sets.
Related issues
| Issue | Project | State | Summary | Similarity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| #6423 fix(validation-sets): don't validate new sets | snapcraft | closed | PR #6423 (SNAPCRAFT-1379) fixed edit-validation-sets rejecting brand-new validation sets at sequence 1; approved with no unresolved comments and landed as commit e7b47adb7, stacking on merged PR #6420. | |
| #6413 edit-validation-sets makes it impossible to publish a new revision of an existing sequence (no override) | snapcraft | closed | Regression where edit-validation-sets hard-blocked same-sequence revisions was fixed by merged PR #6420 (commit 2989b5f8b), restoring the non-blocking sequence warning from PR #5545 lost in the #6050 refactor. |