ci(backport): add support for backporting#4774
Conversation
| mv book ${{ runner.temp }}/book/dev-guide | ||
| - name: Deploy to GitHub | ||
| if: ${{ !contains('["pull_request", "merge_group"]', github.event_name) }} | ||
| if: ${{ !contains('["pull_request", "merge_group"]', github.event_name) && !startsWith(github.ref_name, 'backport/') }} |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
There are a lot of docs-deploying jobs already (plus the latest www branch rule for www-specific hotfix from @Kobzol), I don't think we should overwrite GitHub Pages in any more places 😅
|
One suggestion: I think the |
@djc That's exactly what I meant though... As I see it, we're always going to include either a port or a backport process, can we do it otherwise actually? How do you usually do it in other projects you maintain? 🤔 |
|
I imagine some kind of automation can be involved if we enforce semi-parsable PR/commit titles, if there's a |
|
Sorry, I only meant the branch name prefix -- projects like Hickory and rustls use something like what I proposed. Backporting probably doesn't make sense to automate until we're at substantially higher throughput. |
|
@djc Okay, I'd take |
3 participants
Partially addresses #4738.
It turns out that my previous CI refactoring was so good that this change can stay minimal.
cc @FranciscoTGouveia