search

lorenzwalthert / touchstone

Smart benchmarking of pull requests with statistical confidence
https://lorenzwalthert.github.io/touchstone
Other
53 stars 7 forks source link

New actions fail on repo with fork #98

Closed lorenzwalthert closed 2 years ago

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

In {styler}, I can't seem to make the action pass after replacing the Workflows with the templates from {touchstone}: https://github.com/r-lib/styler/actions/runs/1699543116

Any idea why? There is a corresponding PR that shows passing but the comment from {touchstone} is missing. From the error message, it seems like the secrets context is missing.

assignUser commented 2 years ago

I think we have to pass the token into the action explicitly (No idea why it worked during my tests...). I will create a quick patch for main.

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

Thanks @assignUser. With #99, still no luck. Now seems an unrelated {pak} problem. https://github.com/r-lib/styler/runs/4828086477?check_suite_focus=true.

assignUser commented 2 years ago

I had that error with simstudy the last days, usually running the job again works. I will open an issue in the actions repo.

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

ok, will try re-run.

assignUser commented 2 years ago

https://github.com/r-lib/actions/issues/483

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

Thanks for the issue 👍 .

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

And it failed again https://github.com/r-lib/styler/runs/4828631586?check_suite_focus=true... Hope this can be fixed or it's just by chance.

assignUser commented 2 years ago

Ugh, that's annoying... I think it's by chance maybe some request times out? They are using RSPM for dependency resolution afaik so maybe somethings spotty there? I'll add that run to the issue.

assignUser commented 2 years ago

It works! :tada: https://github.com/r-lib/styler/pull/868#issuecomment-1013752623

lorenzwalthert commented 2 years ago

Indeed, it did 🥳. Let's see how it goes with the {pak} error in the future. I previously started using a more recent RSPM as you suggested.