Propagate run:once errors to all dependents

[edrevo]

Motivation

Let's say we have this Gremlins-inspired Taskfile.yml

Just for context, Gremlins cannot be fed or bathed after midnight or they will become evil.

version: '3'
run: once
tasks:
  ensure-before-midnight:
    cmds:
      - exit 1
  feed-gremlins:
    deps:
      - ensure-before-midnight
    cmds:
      - echo "feed the gremlins"
  bathe-gremlins:
    deps:
      - ensure-before-midnight
    cmds:
      - echo "bathe the gremlins"

If it is after midnight and we run task feed-gremlins the task fails. Same thing for task bathe-gremlins. However, if we run task bathe-gremlins feed-gremlins --parallel then one of the tasks will run and the other will be skipped, and we end up with an evil Gremlin.

Which one depends entirely on timing issues.

❯ task bathe-gremlins feed-gremlins --parallel -C 0
task: [ensure-before-midnight] exit 1
task: [feed-gremlins] sleep 2
task: Failed to run task "bathe-gremlins": task: Failed to run task "ensure-before-midnight": exit status 1

❯ task bathe-gremlins feed-gremlins --parallel -C 0
task: [ensure-before-midnight] exit 1
task: [bathe-gremlins] sleep 2
task: Failed to run task "feed-gremlins": task: Failed to run task "ensure-before-midnight": exit status 1

Change

This PR propagates not only the completion status of dependent tasks, but also the exit status of the tasks. That means that if task A has task B as a dependency, it will never run if task B failed (this is currently not the case).

I have taken the conservative route and added the new behavior behind a CLI flag, although I would personally define this as a bug given the fact that which task gets run and which doesn't is non-deterministic.

[edrevo]

Hi @andreynering / @vmaerten! I see you've been active lately on the repo by merging PRs. Is there anything I could do to get this PR reviewed? I am happy to make any changes required to get this through. Thanks for your hard work on this project!

[andrea-mosk]

Any update on this one? I have been hitting the very same issue 😕 Merging this would be great

cc @andreynering & @vmaerten 🙏

[edrevo]

Gentle ping on this PR. I still have hopes of being able to getting it reviewed.

[trulede]

@edrevo Can you update your simple example so that demonstrates the behaviour this fixes.

And why is this behaviour not a bug?

[edrevo]

@trulede , done.

And why is this behaviour not a bug?

I would consider it a bug. But I'm not sure what the project's policy is regarding breaking changes (even if due to bugs). I am happy to rework and simplify the code to force the correct behavior for everyone, if you agree it is a bug.

[drodriguezhdez]

@edrevo @trulede @vmaerten, any update on this? I had this issue several times. 🙏🏼

[trulede]

I think this is a bug and the PR should be updated accordingly. @vmaerten may have a more authoritative opinion on that.

[edrevo]

@trulede @vmaerten , PR has been updated to fix this behavior for everyone (no extra flag anymore).