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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

ci: standardise workflows using SciML's reusable workflows #808

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

ci: standardise workflows using SciML's reusable workflows #808

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+46 −128

Conversation

thazhemadam
Copy link
Member

Update the workflows in this repository to use SciML's reusable workflows.
This is part of a larger effort to standardise the SciML's CI workflows for more generic and common requirements, to keep the workflows uniform and easier to maintain.

@isaacsas
Copy link
Member

Thanks. We can add these with Catalyst 14, unfortunately merging now would lead to broken dev docs so this has to wait till that is merged to master.

@thazhemadam
Copy link
Member Author

unfortunately merging now would lead to broken dev docs so this has to wait till that is merged to master.

I'm confused, why do we have to wait? The documentation workflows haven't been standardised (yet), so remain unaffected by this. Aren't these mutually exclusive?
That said, I'm okay to wait to have this merged.

@thazhemadam
ci: update invalidations workflow to use centralised reusable workflow
b2939bd
@thazhemadam
ci: update format check workflow to use centralised reusable workflow
20b9a9d
@thazhemadam
ci: standardise the tests workflow, using the reusable workflow
a8ab073 
* Standardise the tests workflow, using the reusab SciML tests workflow.
* Rename the tests workflow to `Tests.yml`, instead of `CI.yml`, since
it's more semantically correct and CI encompasses all the workflows that
are run.
@thazhemadam
ci: update documentation workflow to use centralised reusable workflow
8122359
@thazhemadam thazhemadam requested a review from TorkelE May 27, 2024 16:18
@TorkelE
Copy link
Member

TorkelE commented May 28, 2024

The seems to be some errors in the runtests that are not there on normal CI runs? Is this something that is related to this PR, or a normal MTK issue that for some reason only does things for this PR?

@thazhemadam
Copy link
Member Author

thazhemadam commented May 28, 2024 •
edited

depwarn is set to true with the new centralised workflows, which seems to be the reason why the tests are failing.
This can be configured to be set to false as well, if that's what you'd prefer instead (although it's not recommended).

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@TorkelE TorkelE Awaiting requested review from TorkelE

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
3 participants
@thazhemadam @isaacsas @TorkelE