-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
Exe download priority, after migration users validation, before logoff #270
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🩺 Stability & Availability | 🟠 Major | ⚡ Quick win
Early-exit uses failure exit code for a benign "no users" state.
The new early exit at Line 706 calls
exit 1when$UsersToMigrateis empty. For theDescriptiondata source,Get-MgUserFromDescreturns$nullsimply when there are no pending users to migrate (e.g., all users already migrated, or a routine check-in) — this is not necessarily an error condition. Exiting with code 1 will likely be recorded as a failed JumpCloud command run, which can generate false-positive failure alerts for otherwise-healthy systems.This also appears to be genuinely new behavior (per the AI summary), which conflicts with the PR description's statement that no new behavior beyond reordering is expected.
Consider using
exit 0for this no-op case, or reserve exit 1 for genuine failures.💡 Proposed fix
📝 Committable suggestion
🤖 Prompt for AI Agents
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is correct, if there are no users to migrate, we do want to throw an exit 1 to indicate something happened that we didn't expect. In this context an exit code 1 is good enough to denote there was an error with data prep. If no users are able to migrated I want an exit code 1.
An alternative would be to define a table of new exit codes:
1 error
2 no users to migrate
3 data validation error etc
The team can take this back and work as a separate card but for this change it's fine to keep it as is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@jworkmanjc, understood — thanks for the clarification. Keepingexit 1for the "no users to migrate" case makes sense given the current convention of using exit 1 to denote any unexpected/error condition in this script. The idea of a structured exit code table (e.g., 1=error, 2=no users, 3=data validation) is a nice enhancement for more granular alerting/triage, but agreed that's reasonable to defer as a separate follow-up card rather than bundling it into this reorder-focused PR.Let me know if you'd like me to open a follow-up issue to track the structured exit code idea.
✏️ Learnings added