ci: soft fail for upcoming bazel job

[rickeylev]

Upcoming RC builds may have regressions, so instead of blocking our CI on their failures,
mark them as soft-fail. This way we can be aware of upcoming problems, but not block
regular development.

[gemini-code-assist]

Summary of Changes

Hello, I'm Gemini Code Assist¹! I'm currently reviewing this pull request and will post my feedback shortly. In the meantime, here's a summary to help you and other reviewers quickly get up to speed!

This pull request introduces a crucial adjustment to the continuous integration pipeline, specifically targeting the 'upcoming Bazel' build configuration. The primary goal is to enhance development velocity by preventing potential regressions in Bazel Release Candidate (RC) builds from completely halting the CI process. By implementing a 'soft fail' for certain exit statuses, the system will still flag issues for awareness but will not block subsequent development, ensuring a smoother workflow while maintaining visibility into potential problems.

Highlights

• CI Configuration: The CI configuration for the 'Default: Ubuntu, upcoming Bazel' job has been updated to implement a 'soft fail' mechanism.
• Error Handling: This change specifically configures the job to soft fail if it exits with status codes 1 or 3, preventing it from blocking the entire CI pipeline.
• Release Candidate Stability: The modification addresses potential instability in Bazel Release Candidate (RC) builds, allowing development to continue even if RC builds introduce regressions.

🧠 New Feature in Public Preview: You can now enable Memory to help Gemini Code Assist learn from your team's feedback. This makes future code reviews more consistent and personalized to your project's style. Click here to enable Memory in your admin console.

Changelog

• .bazelci/presubmit.yml
  • Added 'soft_fail' configuration to the 'Default: Ubuntu, upcoming Bazel' task to prevent blocking CI on specific exit statuses.

Activity

• No human activity has been recorded on this pull request yet.

Using Gemini Code Assist

The full guide for Gemini Code Assist can be found on our documentation page, here are some quick tips.

Invoking Gemini

You can request assistance from Gemini at any point by creating a comment using either /gemini <command> or @gemini-code-assist <command>. Below is a summary of the supported commands on the current page.

Feature	Command	Description
Code Review	/gemini review	Performs a code review for the current pull request in its current state.
Pull Request Summary	/gemini summary	Provides a summary of the current pull request in its current state.
Comment	@gemini-code-assist	Responds in comments when explicitly tagged, both in pull request comments and review comments.
Help	/gemini help	Displays a list of available commands.

Customization

To customize Gemini Code Assist for GitHub experience, repository maintainers can create a configuration file and/or provide a custom code review style guide (such as PEP-8 for Python) by creating and adding files to a .gemini/ folder in the base of the repository. Detailed instructions can be found here.

Limitations & Feedback

Gemini Code Assist may make mistakes. Please leave feedback on any instances where its feedback is incorrect or counter productive. You can react with 👍 and 👎 on @gemini-code-assist comments. If you're interested in giving your feedback about your experience with Gemini Code Assist for Github and other Google products, sign up here.

You can also get AI-powered code generation, chat, as well as code reviews directly in the IDE at no cost with the Gemini Code Assist IDE Extension.

Footnotes

1. Review the Privacy Notices, Generative AI Prohibited Use Policy, Terms of Service, and learn how to configure Gemini Code Assist in GitHub here. Gemini can make mistakes, so double check it and use code with caution. ↩

[gemini-code-assist]

Code Review

This pull request correctly identifies the need to soft-fail CI jobs for upcoming Bazel release candidates to avoid blocking development due to potential regressions. The implementation is sound. I've suggested a small improvement to make the soft-fail configuration more comprehensive by including additional exit codes that could also indicate a regression in a Bazel RC.