# Notify the user that a canceled job will be re-started shortly

**URL:** <https://travis-ci.community/t/notify-the-user-that-a-canceled-job-will-be-re-started-shortly/201>\
**Category:** Travis CI Discussions & Feedback\
**Tags:** notifications\
**Created:** [September 29, 2018, 8:27am UTC](https://travis-ci.community/t/notify-the-user-that-a-canceled-job-will-be-re-started-shortly/201 "2018-09-29T08:27:21Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![mfwitten](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/d78d45/32.png) [@mfwitten](https://travis-ci.community/u/mfwitten)\
**Post date:** [September 29, 2018, 8:27am UTC](https://travis-ci.community/t/notify-the-user-that-a-canceled-job-will-be-re-started-shortly/201/1 "2018-09-29T08:27:21Z")

</div>

I experienced unexpected behavior when working with [this pull request](https://github.com/sahib/rmlint/pull/314).

I had pushed [this commit](https://github.com/sahib/rmlint/pull/314/commits/84ad97fe4f5db934ffce25dd02bf2d5f23bb1e5d) to the relevant branch, which I recall having triggered your CI process; however, I then forcibly (non-fast-forward) pushed another commit to that branch almost immediately thereafter (an&nbsp;ancestor), which apparently canceled the first CI job and started a second. But, I didn’t stop there! I pushed that original commit (84ad97fe…) _back_ to the branch, yet it neither canceled that second job in order to re-initiate the first, nor canceled that second job in order to create a third. Instead, it pulled up the cached results for the first job: “X”; failed; canceled.

Well, I did the silly thing: I closed the “errant” pull request, and opened another; naturally, the cached result still appeared. So, I altered the commit hash (by modifying the commit object) and then forcibly pushed it, thereby resolving the issue, as this triggered a successful CI process.

However, I later noticed that the closed pull request also ended up showing success with the original commit, so I could have just waited for it, I guess; if that be the case, then I suggest the following:

- Notify people (including on GitHub) that a new job will be started soon, or provide a button to initiate a re-try manually.