Some suggestions on Preview Apps

[FlorianSuchan]

Hi there, we started testing preview apps and have a few suggestions. Maybe you already know workarounds, would be happy to hear if there are:

1. Currently only on open PR a preview app is created. If you close the PR and later reopen it, there is no preview app being created, would be nice if this would happen.
2. Once the build process starts, Qovery posts a comment in the PRs conversations. To actually open the app, you need to click that link, go to the web process and click “open”. Also this requires that all QAs need access to Qovery. Would be great if once the deployment is done, Qovery posts the actual link to the app in the PRs comments
3. The naming of preview apps seems a bit odd: [PR] Why not using the name of the branch? More descriptive than the name of a commit.

Hope that helps further improving your products, cheers,
Florian

[rophilogene (Romaric Philogene)]

Hi @FlorianSuchan , thanks for your feedback. I respond inline

@FlorianSuchan

Currently only on open PR a preview app is created. If you close the PR and later reopen it, there is no preview app being created, would be nice if this would happen.

It makes total sense to me and it’s a shame that this use case is not supported today. I put in cc @a_carrano @Florian_Lepont PMs at Qovery.

@FlorianSuchan

Once the build process starts, Qovery posts a comment in the PRs conversations. To actually open the app, you need to click that link, go to the web process and click “open”. Also this requires that all QAs need access to Qovery. Would be great if once the deployment is done, Qovery posts the actual link to the app in the PRs comments

I agree! Maybe something even better would be to update the status of the Preview Environment in real-time in the current PR. I don’t know the amount required for supporting something like that. Lastly, your suggestion is a good one and can help to also report if something goes wrong while creating the environment. I let @a_carrano and @Florian_Lepont handle this feedback.

@FlorianSuchan

The naming of preview apps seems a bit odd: [PR] Why not using the name of the branch? More descriptive than the name of a commit.

I agree too. @Florian_Lepont @a_carrano can we do something here?

---

Thank you @FlorianSuchan for your feedback. It helps a lot

[FlorianSuchan]

Very welcome @rophilogene

[a_carrano (Alessandro Carrano)]

@rophilogene

@FlorianSuchan

The naming of preview apps seems a bit odd: [PR] Why not using the name of the branch? More descriptive than the name of a commit.

Hey @FlorianSuchan ,

(I’m cleaning the fourm)

Most of the points mentioned above should be done now:

1. you can trigger again in the comment the command /qovery preview xxx and this will create again the preview env
2. we now send a message once the env is created or it has failed
3. we will review completely this part in the next 2-3 months (but I think you’re not interested anymore since you manage this in your CI now)

[moisesrodriguez]

@a_carrano point 3 is something I’m very much interested in.