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

CI, MAINT: Add docs-only option to CI #26316

Draft
wants to merge 3 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

melissawm
Copy link
Member

@melissawm melissawm commented Apr 19, 2024

Borrows logic from SciPy CI skip checks implemented by @lucascolley

I will test on my own fork first before marking as ready for review, but if you have corrections or suggestions already please let me know.

See #26311 (comment)

melissawm and others added 2 commits April 19, 2024 15:31
Borrows logic from SciPy CI

Co-authored-by: Lucas Colley <lucas.colley8@gmail.com>
@melissawm melissawm changed the title CI, MAINT: Add docs-only and lint-only options to CI CI, MAINT: Add docs-only option to CI Apr 19, 2024
[skip azp][skip cirrus][skip actions]
@@ -13,7 +13,12 @@ permissions:
contents: read # to fetch code (actions/checkout)

jobs:
get_commit_message:
name: Get commit message
uses: ./.github/workflows/commit_message.yml
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This already skips the run if not docs-only, right? Can we encode that into the name?

In general, I think having [docs only] is awesome (a github label might also be, easier to add by maintainer, but a different thing).

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Agreed, the naming in SciPy is historical as an existing job was modified.

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.

None yet

3 participants