Closed MaxMustermann2 closed 3 months ago
Currently, there is a change in proto/exocore/dogfood/v1/dogfood.proto
reported by the break-check action as a breaking change. However, the run has passed since we set continue-on-error
to true. The result of the workflow has been uploaded as an artifact. The artifact contains the PR number as well.
There is a downside to this approach that the result is not immediately visible on the PR's front page (although it is visible within the files changed tab). To work around this problem, I set up another workflow to comment its result. When proto-comment.yml
is merged to develop
it will ideally start running in response to (and after) proto.yml
automatically.
In the last push to the develop branch, semgrep complained about minor things: docker compose security attributes (fixed), a mutex not being unlocked (which has now been added to the list ignored files) and the conversion of uint64 to uint32 (fix taken from 26d7b72efd7b7d5c028bc015079d7d016590bddd).
An edit has been made to the
test.yml
workflow by splitting the coverage and comment workflows into two parts, thereby fixing a potential security hole.Lastly, this PR silences the failure of buf's breaking check instead posting it as a comment to the PR. Since we are in the phase of rapid prototyping and testing, these failures add unneeded noise to all of the pull requests. However, the information provided by the workflow is still relevant, and hence, its status is posted as a comment to the pull request instead.