Closed reginafcompton closed 1 year ago
@ecedmondson - there's not to review here. Can you: (1) consider my questions, and (2) identify anything critical I might be overlooking in our CI pipeline.
I know this has been lingering...I have been very busy and have not yet had a chance to look at it. I am planning to try and carve out some time Wednesday evening. I hope that's alright! Thank you for the patience.
should we run this when pushing to main? I suppose so.
I thought that was the point of this, so, I think so.
is there a way to block merging until this passes? or is that a paid feature? Looks like that is a paid feature: https://docs.github.com/en/repositories/configuring-branches-and-merges-in-your-repository/managing-protected-branches/managing-a-branch-protection-rule
I found these: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/expressions
I wondered if we could come up with something hacky using always() or success() to prevent merges...but I assume if branch protection rules are a paid feature that the folks who implemented the paid feature wouldn't permit a hack around...
Some other thoughts I had, extremely non-blocking, is to implement a job that would conditionally rerun if certain tests (flaky, not that we have any, I don't think) fail with a keyword. We did this at RS, so, for example, if a job flaked we would comment "rerun please" and the comment event would trigger a rerun. We might be able to do something like that with this: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#issue_comment
a job that would conditionally rerun if certain tests (flaky, not that we have any, I don't think) fail with a keyword.
ooooooooooooooohh. I like this.
we should add a flaky test so we can do this.
we should add a flaky test so we can do this.
A nonsense flaky test...right?
I opened a ticket for the stick-it-to-the-man-because-we-are-a-non-profit hack: https://github.com/americanhandelsociety/americanhandelsociety-members/issues/166
A trivial change to test CI once more
That documentation seems useful, but in the future if you don't have anything useful to add, you can do empty commits (I am sorry if I am telling you something you already know)
git commit --allow-empty -m "I love empty commits!"
Closes #54
you can do empty commits
oh I know! I actually had this change stashed because I noticed that weird indentation issue a little while ago.
oh I know! I actually had this change stashed because I noticed that weird indentation issue a little while ago.
I apologize for overexplaining!
This PR adds a Github workflow that does the following:
The workflow runs when pushing a commit to a branch against main.
Questions: