-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 937
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
Conversation
This stack of pull requests is managed by Graphite. Learn more about stacking. Join @ethanndickson and the rest of your teammates on |
d23f235
to
a2a3e04
Compare
a2a3e04
to
8ee58ff
Compare
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.
Left a comment otherwise looks good to me.
needs: changes | ||
if: needs.changes.outputs.docs-only == 'true' || needs.changes.outputs.ci == 'true' || github.ref == 'refs/heads/main' |
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.
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.
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.
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()
.
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.
The default is success()
, I think. Why do we need always()
?
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.
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.
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 runninggen
.(Because I broke it, currently PR
gen
is getting skipped unless theci
category is updated)