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 Request] Don't trigger Pull Request Status Check for drafts #1051

Open
cegekaJG opened this issue Apr 23, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1132
Open

[Feature Request] Don't trigger Pull Request Status Check for drafts #1051

cegekaJG opened this issue Apr 23, 2024 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #1132
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@cegekaJG
Copy link
Contributor

cegekaJG commented Apr 23, 2024

I tend to create a PR very early to give my team and myself an overview of what I'm working on, but I don't need to run the build pipeline until I'm ready.
The "Pull Request Handler" workflow shouldn't trigger if a PR is still a draft, otherwise there's no way to prevent the workflow from running after creating a PR. If other users rely on status checks for drafts (not sure if that's the case, skipping status checks until the PR is ready for review is the default behavior), the AL Go settings could include a flag that adds a condition for the workflow after running a system file update.

@aholstrup1 aholstrup1 added the enhancement New feature or request label Apr 25, 2024
@cegekaJG
Copy link
Contributor Author

cegekaJG commented May 2, 2024

If a maintainer can point me in the right direction, I can make a pull request for this. I already did this for my fork, but I'm not sure where to exactly add the condition without accidentally skipping something else.

@cegekaJG cegekaJG linked a pull request Jul 3, 2024 that will close this issue
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants