Skip ci if pr is a draft commit#46353
Conversation
There's no need to run ci for wip commits.
|
Draft prs shouldn't go through all the build/test? |
|
I think it is valueable to run Draft PRs also through CI. Then as a contributor you can have early feedback. Before opening a PR up toreviewers and generating notifications. What else should a WIP/Draft PR be for? |
|
I think that's fair, I was coming in from a perspective of I know my pr is half baked and is not ready to be merged (and so is highly likely to fail in ci). I mainly use drafts to get early feedback on direction of code from specific folks with context on the task. But I don't have a strong opinion on this so I'm good with closing it as not needed. |
|
I agree with Jens that there is value in having them go through CI. If it's half baked and a bunch of tests are failing, you won't catch any flak at all. In fact, it's nice you can defer notifying reviewers until you know everything is green, particularly if you think tests across a lot of places may fail. I do it pretty often myself. We already use selective checks to optimize and only run tests that need to run for a given change. I'm sure there is still gains to be had, but the low hanging fruit is already picked there (at least afaik 😄). Thanks for the PR, but I'm going to close this one. |
|
You can always add |
There's no need to run ci for wip
commits.
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.