TEP-0165: Ordering Finally Tasks with runAfterAlways#1278
Open
jangel97 wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Contributor
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
|
|
0590d40 to
49f189f
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
This TEP proposes a new field
runAfterAlwaysfor finally tasks that enables ordering between finally tasks without breaking the guaranteed-execution contract.Unlike
runAfter(which implies dependency and can skip downstream tasks on failure),runAfterAlwaysmeans "wait for the referenced task to complete — regardless of success or failure — then run unconditionally."Motivation
Today, all finally tasks execute in parallel. While this was a deliberate design decision, there are legitimate use cases where ordering is needed — not dependency, just sequencing. Current workarounds (merging tasks, chaining pipelines via Triggers, polling shared workspaces) are complex, fragile, or sacrifice task reusability.
Use Cases
Key Design Decisions
runAfterAlwaysonly valid inspec.finally(validation rejects it on regular tasks)runAfterremains forbidden in finally blocksRelated: tektoncd/pipeline#6919