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

feature(ci): add to the option to skip CI checking #1014

Closed
takeutak opened this issue Jun 8, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1336
Closed

feature(ci): add to the option to skip CI checking #1014

takeutak opened this issue Jun 8, 2021 · 2 comments · Fixed by #1336
Assignees
Labels
bug Something isn't working enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@takeutak
Copy link
Contributor

takeutak commented Jun 8, 2021

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
According to the current configuration, every time a Pull request is merged into the main branch, the CI check must be redone. Considering that it takes more than an hour to complete a CI check, I think that we cannot cope with a situation where the code needs frequent changes.
However, it is not large enough that all code has to be CI checked every time (For example, there is no need to do CI check on pull-requests including only document files, right?). Since CI check is mandatory for all pull-requests, this inconvenience will occur.

Describe the solution you'd like
I would like to be able to choose to avoid CI checks when merging pull-requests. Is it possible to change the specification? @petermetz

@takeutak takeutak added the enhancement New feature or request label Jun 8, 2021
@takeutak takeutak added the bug Something isn't working label Jun 8, 2021
@RafaelAPB
Copy link
Contributor

Can our plan of the CI run several PRs concurrently?

@petermetz
Copy link
Contributor

@takeutak Agreed. We could add a check in the ci.sh script that examines the diff between main and the PR branch, iterates over the files in the diff and checks if it's only .md files then it immediately exists with success.

@RafaelAPB We have the technical capability for that, but at the end of the day we must always execute the tests sequentially to avoid inadvertently merging in bugs that only manifest when two separate PRs are both merged together on main (happened a few times before so that's why I had to configure it in a way that GH always forces you to run the tests against a freshly rebased version of the PR branch)

AzaharaC added a commit to AzaharaC/cactus that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2021
…1014

Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
AzaharaC added a commit to AzaharaC/cactus that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2021
…1014

Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
AzaharaC added a commit to AzaharaC/cactus that referenced this issue Sep 15, 2021
…1014

Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
petermetz pushed a commit that referenced this issue Sep 21, 2021
Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
brioux pushed a commit to brioux/cactus that referenced this issue Oct 4, 2021
…1014

Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
RafaelAPB pushed a commit to RafaelAPB/blockchain-integration-framework that referenced this issue Mar 9, 2022
…1014

Signed-off-by: AzaharaC <a.castano.benito@accenture.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug Something isn't working enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

4 participants