Deployment steps missing (upgrade to 3.11.3)

Hi support

We are having an issue where a release created before an upgrade to 3.11.3 is missing steps in the deployment process when attempting to deploy to certain environments (for now, we are in the process of testing all other environments).

When deploying the release and expanding the steps that will be run, all of the expected steps in the process are shown, however, when you initiate the deployment, some steps are skipped. We’re trying to establish any commonality between the steps which are omitted.

Please let us know soon as if you’ve seen this before with this version

Cheers
Leslie

On further investigation, we’re finding the same issue as here:
http://help.octopusdeploy.com/discussions/problems/51846-task-log-layout-not-displaying-expected-output-during-deployment

Cheers
Leslie

Hello Leslie,
Thanks for getting in touch. Sorry this was a bug we introduced in 3.11.1 it’s to do with disabled steps, and the skip all action, it was introduced as part of showing disabled steps are not running in the advanced view.

The issue is here: https://github.com/OctopusDeploy/Issues/issues/3233

It’s fixed in 3.11.4 which is available for download: https://octopus.com/downloads
Please let us know if you’re still experiencing the issue after going to 3.11.4.

Regards,
Nick

Hi Leslie,

Please accept my apologies, I made a mistake in understanding your issue. I linked you to something that was to do with disabled steps. It looks like that’s not the problem you’re experiencing.

We’re close to a fix on an issue to do with steps out of order, like the other ticket you linked to in your follow up comment.

I will keep you in the loop on that and let you know when it’s ready. In summary 3.11.4 will not resolve your issue, we’re preparing a fix that will be a 3.11.5 release.

Best Regards,
Nick

Hello Leslie,

We just released 3.11.5 that contains just the fix for the step ordering issue: https://octopus.com/downloads

Full details here: https://github.com/OctopusDeploy/Issues/issues/3235#issuecomment-283850641

Regards,
Nick