search

ImagingDataCommons / idc-index-data

Python package providing the index to query and download data hosted by the NCI Imaging Data Commons
MIT License
1 stars 4 forks source link

chore: remove placeholder branch as it is no longer needed #4

Closed vkt1414 closed 8 months ago

vkt1414 commented 8 months ago

Previously we were creating a dummy commit to keep-alive branch. However with GitHub's new API endpoint to enable github actions, there is no longer a need to commit at all. v2 of the gha started using the GitHub's new API endpoint.

jcfr commented 8 months ago

Since we have dependabot setup to run on a weekly basis, I anticipate we will get at least a few PRs every month, for this reason I am not sure it makes sense to have such workflow.

See https://github.com/ImagingDataCommons/idc-index-data/blob/main/.github%2Fdependabot.yml

jcfr commented 8 months ago

Now, if we still think it is sensible, I suggest we also contribute it upstream at https://github.com/scientific-python/cookie/tree/main/%7B%7Bcookiecutter.project_name%7D%7D%2F.github%2Fworkflows

vkt1414 commented 8 months ago

Since we have dependabot setup to run on a weekly basis, I anticipate we will get at least a few PRs every month, for this reason I am not sure it makes sense to have such workflow.

See https://github.com/ImagingDataCommons/idc-index-data/blob/main/.github%2Fdependabot.yml

I did not think about the dependabot alerts. So I guess we may never need the keep-alive action. I'm okay either way keeping the gha or removing it.

Now, if we still think it is sensible, I suggest we also contribute it upstream at https://github.com/scientific-python/cookie/tree/main/%7B%7Bcookiecutter.project_name%7D%7D%2F.github%2Fworkflows

Absolutely! I'll submit a PR.

jcfr commented 8 months ago

Absolutely! I'll submit a PR.

:pray:

In the meantime, we will move forward with the integration.

As a nitpick, since this doesn't fix the package functionality but only the CI, prefixing the message with ci: may be more appropriate.

vkt1414 commented 8 months ago

Absolutely! I'll submit a PR.

🙏

In the meantime, we will move forward with the integration.

As a nitpick, since this doesn't fix the package functionality but only the CI, prefixing the message with ci: may be more appropriate.

Thank you! I do want to follow the best practices and will keep it in mind. Could you provide any resources to learn these conventions?

created a PR on cookie repo now: https://github.com/scientific-python/cookie/pull/390