Skip to content
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

Reusable action workflows #3285

Merged
merged 12 commits into from May 10, 2024

Conversation

infotroph
Copy link
Member

Description

Avoids repeating ourselves by defining the test/check/sipnet workflows once and calling them from both the on-push and the weekly Actions.

Motivation and Context

Review Time Estimate

  • Immediately
  • Within one week
  • When possible

Types of changes

  • Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
  • New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
  • Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)

Checklist:

  • My change requires a change to the documentation.
  • My name is in the list of CITATION.cff
  • I have updated the CHANGELOG.md.
  • I have updated the documentation accordingly.
  • I have read the CONTRIBUTING document.
  • I have added tests to cover my changes.
  • All new and existing tests passed.

@GandalfGwaihir
Copy link
Collaborator

Ahh, finally breaking down our CI into subparts, Will get to review this week, but okay if @robkooper finishes it before me :)

Copy link
Collaborator

@GandalfGwaihir GandalfGwaihir left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I see no major changes required as I see that all the test run in the workflows on this PR, we need to make certain workflows as required, but that needs to be done by you guys (People with access to settings).

I just doubt about ci-weekly but let's merge this and see if that runs okay,

Thanks for the effort to decouple our CI @infotroph , things will look a lot more sorted now!

@GandalfGwaihir
Copy link
Collaborator

From the logs, the docker failure seems unrelated, can you merge main @infotroph , lets see if the docker passes now

@infotroph
Copy link
Member Author

infotroph commented May 6, 2024

we need to make certain workflows as required

I don't think this PR will change anything there -- we've effectively kept the same workflows under the same names, but moved their definitions out to another file. @GandalfGwaihir do you see changes needed that I missed here?

Edit: I see what you mean now -- turns out GitHub labels them differently even when we don't change the names. Yes, I'll handle this on merge.

@infotroph infotroph enabled auto-merge May 7, 2024 17:36
@infotroph infotroph added this pull request to the merge queue May 10, 2024
Merged via the queue into PecanProject:develop with commit c59fe91 May 10, 2024
13 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants