This PR is another attempt at sorting out the teething issue we've been experiencing when it comes to our automated Bikeshed CI builds.
Currently, the CI build commits changes to the built spec/identity/index.html file within the same branch in which changes to the sourcespec/identity/index.bs file are made. This makes PRs harder to review as users can be tricked into reviewing both the built .html file and the source .bs. It also leads to a rather unpleasant commit history.
This PR makes the CI build commit changes to the built .bs file into a separate branch with the ci/ prefix prepended to the original branch's name, ignoring changes to the built .html everywhere else.
Should this PR be merged in, we'll need to change the branch served by GitHub Pages to the ci/main branch.
Tagging @woutermont and @TallTed for review. I'll merge this relatively quickly as it has nothing to do with the spec itself and it's a fix for something we have already agreed upon (i.e. using Bikeshed).
This PR is another attempt at sorting out the teething issue we've been experiencing when it comes to our automated Bikeshed CI builds.
Currently, the CI build commits changes to the built
spec/identity/index.htmlfile within the same branch in which changes to the sourcespec/identity/index.bsfile are made. This makes PRs harder to review as users can be tricked into reviewing both the built.htmlfile and the source.bs. It also leads to a rather unpleasant commit history.This PR makes the CI build commit changes to the built
.bsfile into a separate branch with theci/prefix prepended to the original branch's name, ignoring changes to the built.htmleverywhere else.Should this PR be merged in, we'll need to change the branch served by GitHub Pages to the
ci/mainbranch.Tagging @woutermont and @TallTed for review. I'll merge this relatively quickly as it has nothing to do with the spec itself and it's a fix for something we have already agreed upon (i.e. using Bikeshed).