fix(ci): label root scala build files and .asf.yaml so the right stacks run#4654
Merged
Yicong-Huang merged 5 commits intoMay 2, 2026
Merged
Conversation
Root-level scala build / lint config (build.sbt, project/**, .scalafix.conf, .scalafmt.conf) was not under any label that maps to the scala stack: build.sbt only matched dependencies (a no-op in LABEL_STACKS, apache#4640), and the others matched no rule at all. A PR that only edits these files therefore skipped scala in CI even though the change is purely a scala build/lint setting. Extend the service rule to also match those root files. service already maps to the scala stack, so the union picks up scala automatically. Closes apache#4653. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Changes to repo-level ASF config (branch protection rulesets, mailing list routing, GitHub features) currently match no rule and run no stack. Map it to ci so all four stacks gate the change. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Yicong-Huang
changed the title
Workflow-adjacent sources (CI helper scripts under .github/scripts and the labeler config itself) should gate on the full matrix, same as .github/workflows. Without this, a PR editing only one of these would match no rule and run no stacks. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Yicong-Huang
added
the
release/v1.1.0-incubating
Per @aglinxinyuan review on apache#4654 — match the whole .github dir under the ci label so issue/PR templates, dependabot, copilot config, etc. also gate on the full matrix. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
github-actions Bot
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
May 2, 2026
…ks run (#4654) ### What changes were proposed in this PR? Close `.github/labeler.yml` gaps where root-level / workflow-adjacent config files matched no rule that maps to a CI stack: **Scala build / lint config → `service` label** (so the scala stack runs): - `build.sbt` (root) - `project/**` (sbt build sources, `plugins.sbt`) - `.scalafix.conf` (moved to root by #3888) - `.scalafmt.conf` Today these match either `**/build.sbt` (label `dependencies`, which `LABEL_STACKS` from #4640 maps to no-op) or no rule at all. A PR that only edits one of them skipped the scala stack — concrete example: PR #4649, labels `dependencies, fix, frontend, release/v1.1.0-incubating`, union `{frontend}`, no scala. `service` already maps to scala in `LABEL_STACKS`, so the union picks up scala automatically. **Workflow-adjacent / repo-wide config → `ci` label** (so the full matrix runs): - `.github/scripts/**` (CI helper scripts) - `.github/labeler.yml` (the labeler config itself) - `.asf.yaml` (branch protection rulesets, mailing list, GitHub features) These currently match no rule. `ci` already maps to all four stacks, which is the right gate for changes that can affect every stack. ### Any related issues, documentation, discussions? Closes #4653. ### How was this PR tested? This PR's own labeler run picks up `ci` (it edits `.github/labeler.yml`), so all stacks gate the change. After merge, future PRs that only edit a root scala build file pick up `service`, and PRs editing `.github/scripts/**`, `.github/labeler.yml`, or `.asf.yaml` pick up `ci`. ### Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling? Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7 (backported from commit 5c7dac8)
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this PR?
Close
.github/labeler.ymlgaps where root-level / workflow-adjacent config files matched no rule that maps to a CI stack:Scala build / lint config →
servicelabel (so the scala stack runs):build.sbt(root)project/**(sbt build sources,plugins.sbt).scalafix.conf(moved to root by fix: move.scalafix.confout to root #3888).scalafmt.confToday these match either
**/build.sbt(labeldependencies, whichLABEL_STACKSfrom #4640 maps to no-op) or no rule at all. A PR that only edits one of them skipped the scala stack — concrete example: PR #4649, labelsdependencies, fix, frontend, release/v1.1.0-incubating, union{frontend}, no scala.servicealready maps to scala inLABEL_STACKS, so the union picks up scala automatically.Workflow-adjacent / repo-wide config →
cilabel (so the full matrix runs):.github/scripts/**(CI helper scripts).github/labeler.yml(the labeler config itself).asf.yaml(branch protection rulesets, mailing list, GitHub features)These currently match no rule.
cialready maps to all four stacks, which is the right gate for changes that can affect every stack.Any related issues, documentation, discussions?
Closes #4653.
How was this PR tested?
This PR's own labeler run picks up
ci(it edits.github/labeler.yml), so all stacks gate the change. After merge, future PRs that only edit a root scala build file pick upservice, and PRs editing.github/scripts/**,.github/labeler.yml, or.asf.yamlpick upci.Was this PR authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
Generated-by: Claude Opus 4.7