"No machines were found for the tenant in the role" is success but should be a fail

[richard.reeves]

See this topic

Fail a release when "no machines were found for the tenant..."

Hi We deploy across a number of tenants and have found that if we have forgotten to setup a machine in the tenant with a role, a release is still marked successful even though a step in the process reports: "Skipping this step as no machines were found for the tenant in the role: " The step in the process is vital for the operation of the software, so I want this configuration error to be considered a deployment failure. Is there a way to mark a step as mandatory? Such that if its skipped …

where the user is advised to suggest this as a feature. I found this suggestion
https://octopusdeploy.uservoice.com/forums/170787-general/suggestions/4225765-error-on-deploy-that-won-t-deploy-due-to-no-machin
which has been “declined”, with no explanation.

Then see this topic

Fail is step skipped because no machines were found

Hello, If in a release a step has no machines to run on it will currently be skipped and marked as succeeded. For us not deploying is seen as a failure and must be avoided. Is there a way or option with which we can make such steps fail the step and thus the deployment?

where the user is requesting the same thing, and is advised to set the “IsRequired” on all of the steps (which I would argue is not the correct solution, since that is not what that property is intended for).

Then see this topic

Deployment step is skipped even the step is set to "Required"

Hello, In our project setting, we set the deployment target status to be “Deployment will fail if a deployment target is unavailable”. Also, in the process, we set one of the steps to be required. However, the actual deployment skipped the step and returned successful result even Octopus couldn’t find the target to deploy to. Please see attached screenshot. [image] Is this designated behavior? Thanks, Ge Octopus Deploy v2019.2.6

where the user has done what is requested in the topic above; but it hasn’t worked - it has still skipped the step, and the explanation is (as I would have expected) that this is by design, because that isn’t what that property is intended for.

I definitely think this should be a failure, since it means you are trying to deploy something and the relevant components are not in place in that environment. Please can someone reconsider the “declined” suggestion (and publish an explanation as to why it was declined). I’m the fifth person who has raised this, and there seems to be no way of doing this, and it is a surprise when Octopus says the deployment was successful; but my components have not been deployed.