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鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Document plutarch-benchmark library & diffing workflow #167
Conversation
Ah looks like this doesn't cause any of the effects to run on the PR, which is the workflow I think we're wanting to facilitate (i.e. running them before they get merged) |
@emiflake Because Hercules/Nix doesn't give us any information about the merge-base. Which means we have to for now assume it's |
Yeah this is not really what I'm asking about in the comment above. I'm okay with that limitation already, I'm more so asking as to why the effect doesn't run on a PR (or on all non-fork commits, that would be fine too). In the future, once hercules adds the button that starts it on fork PRs, then those with that access can execute it to see if there were no major regressions in the benchmarks. |
@emiflake Yes. Although if any maintainer that has push access to this github organization wants to test any PR, they can simply run this and they'll be able to test the PR in the same way you described. It's just not a button on the GitHub interface.
|
Oh neat, good to know, for sure. But this still wouldn't run the |
@emiflake When making effects, I make it without the if statement to test that it works. Then, when I'm sure it works as expected, I add the if statement. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM
This also fixes the lack of
README.md
underplutarch-benchmark
which would cause issues for projects depending on plutarch with haskell.nix 馃Х