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

fix: add ci.yaml to exclude from ci-docs triggers #1163

Closed

Conversation

Shubhranshu153
Copy link
Contributor

@Shubhranshu153 Shubhranshu153 commented Oct 31, 2024

Issue #, if available:

Description of changes:
Add ci.yaml to exclude from ci-docs triggers

Testing done:

  • I've reviewed the guidance in CONTRIBUTING.md

License Acceptance

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that my contribution is made under the terms of the Apache 2.0 license.

@Shubhranshu153 Shubhranshu153 force-pushed the feat-coverage-check branch 3 times, most recently from 66e43e1 to 428e29b Compare October 31, 2024 22:55
@Shubhranshu153 Shubhranshu153 changed the title feat: Add code coverage test fix: add ci.yaml to exclude from ci-docs triggers Oct 31, 2024
@Shubhranshu153 Shubhranshu153 marked this pull request as ready for review October 31, 2024 23:02
@Shubhranshu153 Shubhranshu153 requested a review from a team as a code owner October 31, 2024 23:02
@pendo324
Copy link
Member

pendo324 commented Nov 1, 2024

Is the PR title wrong? I see more changes than just excluding ci.yaml in ci-docs

@@ -201,7 +203,36 @@ jobs:
arch: ${{ matrix.arch }}
version: ${{ matrix.version }}
runner-type: ${{ matrix.runner-type }}

macos-unit-test-coverage:
runs-on: macos-latest
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

We should just add a unit-test-coverage step to the existing unit-tests workflow, instead of creating an entirely new workflow.

We also don't even need to use multiple runners for this, we can use the default ubuntu-latest and set GOOS as needed, per platform, like the linting workflow

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

noted, this i meant to try out things only intention was the exclude, but if we have it in the unit test flow we probably dont need it will cancel this one.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants