Thanks to visit codestin.com
Credit goes to github.com

Skip to content

fix: ensure make gen runs on any changes #15253

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 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2024
Merged

fix: ensure make gen runs on any changes #15253

merged 1 commit into from
Oct 28, 2024

Conversation

ethanndickson
Copy link
Member

@ethanndickson ethanndickson commented Oct 28, 2024

Previously, make gen ran on CI whenever a non-docs change was made. Based off the problem described in #15252, it sounds like CI should always be running gen.

(Because I broke it, currently PR gen is getting skipped unless the ci category is updated)

Copy link
Member Author

This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking.

Join @ethanndickson and the rest of your teammates on Graphite Graphite

@ethanndickson ethanndickson requested a review from Emyrk October 28, 2024 15:43
@ethanndickson ethanndickson marked this pull request as ready for review October 28, 2024 15:43
Copy link
Member

@matifali matifali left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Left a comment otherwise looks good to me.

Comment on lines -236 to -237
needs: changes
if: needs.changes.outputs.docs-only == 'true' || needs.changes.outputs.ci == 'true' || github.ref == 'refs/heads/main'
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think we can just remove the if and needs both. always() is used when we want to run even if the previous job fails.

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think it's worth making it explicit here, it seems quite difficult to find the documentation that says the default condition is always() and not success().

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The default is success(), I think. Why do we need always()?

Copy link
Member Author

@ethanndickson ethanndickson Oct 28, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The old condition didn't check if the previous job had succeeded (it just waited for changes to finish, which always succeeded) so I don't think we need to start checking it now. My understanding is that with success() gen CI wouldn't run if lint failed? Which would mean it would wait for lint to finish, when they could just be started concurrently (especially since gen is one of the faster jobs). Please correct me if I'm wrong.

@ethanndickson ethanndickson merged commit 1d33990 into main Oct 28, 2024
33 checks passed
@ethanndickson ethanndickson deleted the ethan/fix-gen branch October 28, 2024 16:46
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators Oct 28, 2024
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants