As can be seen in this run, restore will hit or miss depending on the order of the paths given.
Not seen on that workflow, but if you use actions/cache/save, it will complain that the cache already exists despite a restore having reported a missed cache, if both use different orders.
Not a good practice on the user side to use different orders, but I guess that the actions could do some sorting to avoid this kind of pitfall.
As can be seen in this run, restore will hit or miss depending on the order of the paths given.
Not seen on that workflow, but if you use
actions/cache/save, it will complain that the cache already exists despite a restore having reported a missed cache, if both use different orders.Not a good practice on the user side to use different orders, but I guess that the actions could do some sorting to avoid this kind of pitfall.