mailing list mirror (one of many)
 help / color / mirror / code / Atom feed
From: Johannes Schindelin <>
To: "SZEDER Gábor" <>
Cc: Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget <>,
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] ci: skip GitHub workflow runs for already-tested commits/trees
Date: Sun, 11 Oct 2020 12:28:33 +0200 (CEST)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1532 bytes --]

Hi Gábor,

On Sat, 10 Oct 2020, SZEDER Gábor wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 09, 2020 at 01:13:03PM +0200, Johannes Schindelin wrote:
> > Since this strategy relies on a Travis-only feature that does not work
> > on the three other CI services we use (Cirrus CI, Azure DevOps, GitHub
> > Actions), I see little point mentioning it in this commit message...
> This commit duplicates already existing functionality, so, yes, the
> commit message should definitely have explained why that already
> existing approach was not suitable for GitHub Actions.

No, this is not duplicating functionality.

The `skip_good_tree()` function requires a persistent directory into which
it writes a record of the trees it considers good, based on past runs. It
later recalls which trees are considers good and skips the current run if
there is a record for this tree.

The fact that it requires a persistent directory binds it to Travis CI. As
far as I can tell, no other CI service offers that feature (and from where
I sit, for good reason, because it is asking for all kinds of fun in
concurrent scenarios).

What my patch does might duplicate the intention, but absolutely not the
functionality. For one, there is no extra record required. It uses the API
to query the existing logs.

Also, the patch specifically adjusts the GitHub workflow itself.
Therefore, unlike the `skip_good_tree()` function, it does not pretend to
be generic (which `skip_good_tree()` really is not, as pointed out above).


  reply	other threads:[~2020-10-12  9:38 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-04-24 17:17 [PATCH] ci: fix GitHub workflow when on a tagged revision Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-04-24 20:50 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-04-24 21:12   ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-04-24 21:24     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-10-08 15:29 ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Do not skip tagged revisions in the GitHub workflow runs Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-10-08 15:29   ` [PATCH v2 1/2] ci: skip GitHub workflow runs for already-tested commits/trees Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-10-09  7:29     ` SZEDER Gábor
2020-10-09 11:13       ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-10-10  7:25         ` SZEDER Gábor
2020-10-11 10:28           ` Johannes Schindelin [this message]
2020-10-12 16:12             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-10-12 18:57               ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-10-15 17:17                 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-10-15 19:39                   ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-10-08 15:29   ` [PATCH v2 2/2] ci: do not skip tagged revisions in GitHub workflows Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-10-08 21:11   ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Do not skip tagged revisions in the GitHub workflow runs Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

  List information:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \ \ \ \ \ \

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox

This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).