ci: Just use regular checkout #86824
Closed
Conversation
This file contains 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
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegas@fb.com> [ghstack-poisoned]
🔗 Helpful Links🧪 See artifacts and rendered test results at hud.pytorch.org/pr/86824
Note: Links to docs will display an error until the docs builds have been completed. ✅ No Failures, 1 PendingAs of commit 10530d1: This comment was automatically generated by Dr. CI and updates every 15 minutes. |
seemethere
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2022
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegasfb.com> ghstack-source-id: 7bffc0fd080c50e3df591d089694da95b4a371b2 Pull Request resolved: #86824
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over where the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegasfb.com> [ghstack-poisoned]
seemethere
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 12, 2022
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegasfb.com> ghstack-source-id: b9121cbfdfc8e3b9a066a32d31091c9ae00f95cf Pull Request resolved: #86824 Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegas@fb.com>
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Merge startedYour change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours). Learn more about merging in the wiki. Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team |
Merge failedReason: HTTP Error 502: Bad Gateway Details for Dev Infra teamRaised by workflow job |
|
@pytorchbot merge |
Merge startedYour change will be merged once all checks pass (ETA 0-4 Hours). Learn more about merging in the wiki. Questions? Feedback? Please reach out to the PyTorch DevX Team |
atalman
pushed a commit
to atalman/pytorch
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2022
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over where the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegas@fb.com> Pull Request resolved: pytorch#86824 Approved by: https://github.com/atalman
This was referenced Oct 13, 2022
atalman
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Oct 13, 2022
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary builds. For builds like https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607 there is a confusion over where the reference is pulled and I believe it is root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch. So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action for this job Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegas@fb.com> Pull Request resolved: #86824 Approved by: https://github.com/atalman Co-authored-by: Eli Uriegas <eliuriegas@fb.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
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.
Stack from ghstack (oldest at bottom):
checkout-pytorch seems to have issues and is purpose made for our PR
testing and appears to conflict with what we're trying to do for binary
builds.
For builds like
https://github.com/pytorch/pytorch/actions/runs/3207520052/jobs/5242479607
there is a confusion over where the reference is pulled and I believe it is
root caused by the checkout logic in checkout-pytorch.
So with that in mind I suggest we just use the upstream checkout action
for this job
Signed-off-by: Eli Uriegas eliuriegas@fb.com