Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

test stuff edited 5 #631

Closed
wants to merge 14 commits into from
Closed

test stuff edited 5 #631

wants to merge 14 commits into from

Conversation

wolfgangwalther
Copy link
Owner

Things done

  • Built on platform(s)
    • x86_64-linux
    • aarch64-linux
    • x86_64-darwin
    • aarch64-darwin
  • For non-Linux: Is sandboxing enabled in nix.conf? (See Nix manual)
    • sandbox = relaxed
    • sandbox = true
  • Tested, as applicable:
  • Tested compilation of all packages that depend on this change using nix-shell -p nixpkgs-review --run "nixpkgs-review rev HEAD". Note: all changes have to be committed, also see nixpkgs-review usage
  • Tested basic functionality of all binary files (usually in ./result/bin/)
  • 25.05 Release Notes (or backporting 24.11 and 25.05 Release notes)
    • (Package updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is major or breaking
    • (Module updates) Added a release notes entry if the change is significant
    • (Module addition) Added a release notes entry if adding a new NixOS module
  • Fits CONTRIBUTING.md.

Add a 👍 reaction to pull requests you find important.

This seems to be unused. It can be triggered manually, but is this
really done?

Is this superseded by the new eval checks or should we instead run this
regularly?
All other workflows do - and most importantly actionlint only runs on
.yml files!
mergedSha is available from needs.get-merge-commit, not needs.attrs.
Actionlint rightfully complains about that.

The code still works as expected because nixpkgs/ is checked out at
mergedSha, so the diff will be between mergedSha and baseSha.
Same top-level ordering of keys / empty lines and same indentation for
yaml lists. One blank line between each step.

Makes it easier to read and compare the workflows.
The eval-aliases job is independent of attrs already and the tag job
doesn't need it to checkout the base branch.
No need for that limitation, which only artifically limits test-ability
of CI in forks.

Some other workflows like backports, cherry-pick checks and periodic
merges are very specific to the release branches and don't need to be
run in forks.
It seems odd to exclude PRs against release branches for those checks -
especially when not excluding PRs against staging-** variants at the
same time.
Less repetition, more consistency.
We currently use two different "base" commits, but the same name. One of
them is the commit in which context the pull_request_target runs. The
other is the parent of the merge commit. Those are **not** necessarily
the same - see README introduced in the next commit for details.

Renaming one of them for clarity. Since the pull_request_target related
base commit is also called like that in GitHub Actions terminology, we
rename the other. The best I could come up with is "target".
This introduces some basic concepts used in these workflows and a common
terminology.

At the same time we remove some of the comments from various workflow
files, because they are assumed to be "general knowledge" through the
README.
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther force-pushed the ci-test branch 2 times, most recently from d85d31b to 1254767 Compare January 8, 2025 21:04
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the title test stuff test stuff edited Jan 8, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the title test stuff edited test stuff edited 2 Jan 8, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from master to staging January 8, 2025 21:15
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from staging to master January 8, 2025 21:15
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the title test stuff edited 2 test stuff edited 3 Jan 8, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from master to staging January 8, 2025 21:21
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from staging to master January 8, 2025 21:22
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the title test stuff edited 3 test stuff edited 4 Jan 8, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the title test stuff edited 4 test stuff edited 5 Jan 9, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from master to staging January 9, 2025 19:02
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther changed the base branch from staging to master January 9, 2025 19:03
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther deleted the ci-test branch January 11, 2025 20:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant