Replies: 2 comments
-
|
While your proposed workaround would technically achieve your goal, it involves a lot of manual friction and temporarily kills your build testing too. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
@jothirmoysarker is exactly right. If you turn off the whole workflow, you lose your build tests. The fastest fix is to just comment out the deploy job in your PR branch so you can merge. If you add that and commit it, GitHub will just skip the deploy step for now. Your PR will turn green, you can merge it, and then you can figure out the hosting problem later. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
🏷️ Discussion Type
Question
💬 Feature/Topic Area
Workflow Deployment
Discussion Details
I've got a GitHub workflow file, with 2 jobs in it. One is for building the application, and the other is for deploying it to my hosting company. The build job works fine, but the deployment job fails. However, I'd really like to get the changes that this PR represents merged into the
mainbranch. But this is blocking the whole works. And it has held it up for a week. I've thought that maybe I could cancel the PR, then mark the GitHub Workflow as disabled. Then re-issue the PR, get the necessary changes intomainand research how I can get the deployment of my web application onto the hosting company.Is that the way I should do it, or is there a better way?
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions