Skip to content

ci: gate CodeQL workflow on .github path changes#1758

Merged
milenkovicm merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
andygrove:ci/codeql-workflows-only-paths
May 24, 2026
Merged

ci: gate CodeQL workflow on .github path changes#1758
milenkovicm merged 1 commit into
apache:mainfrom
andygrove:ci/codeql-workflows-only-paths

Conversation

@andygrove
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@andygrove andygrove commented May 23, 2026

Which issue does this PR close?

Part of apache/datafusion#22455.

Rationale for this change

The CodeQL workflow is configured with languages: actions, so it only scans the GitHub Actions workflow files under .github/. It currently fires on every push and PR regardless of what changed, which means it re-analyzes the same set of workflow files for unrelated Rust, doc, or Python changes. The weekly schedule already guarantees baseline coverage even when nothing in .github/ has been touched.

What changes are included in this PR?

Adds paths: .github/** to the push and pull_request triggers in .github/workflows/codeql.yml. The weekly schedule trigger is unchanged.

Are there any user-facing changes?

No.

CodeQL is configured with `languages: actions`, so it only scans the
GitHub Actions workflow files under `.github/`. It currently runs on
every push and PR regardless of what changed, plus a weekly schedule.
Gate the push and pull_request triggers to `.github/**` so it only
re-analyzes when there is actually something new to analyze. The
weekly schedule is unchanged and keeps base-line coverage even if no
workflow file has changed.
@andygrove andygrove marked this pull request as ready for review May 23, 2026 22:18
@andygrove andygrove requested a review from milenkovicm May 23, 2026 22:18
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@milenkovicm milenkovicm left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

thanks @andygrove

@milenkovicm milenkovicm merged commit 6aaa612 into apache:main May 24, 2026
18 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants