Re: [PATCH v2 1/2] CI: limit GitHub Actions to designated branches

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: May 4, 2020, 22:52 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqzhane2ir.fsf@gitster.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20200504215824.GC45250@syl.local>

Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com> writes:

Show 16 quoted lines

> Huh; I'm not sure that I'm sold on the idea of a 'for-ci' namespace
> here. In addition to running 'make test' on patches locally before I
> send them, I find it tremendously convenient for GitHub to run them for
> me when I push 'tb/' branches up to 'ttaylorr/git'.
>
> So, while the above is more-or-less what I'd expect the monitored list
> of branches to look like (at least, ignoring the missing 'for-ci/**'
> bits), I wish that I could also build every branch that I push up to my
> fork.
>
> Of course, I don't want to maintain a one-patch difference between
> ttaylorr/git@master and git/git@master, so I wonder if we could get a
> little more creative with these rules and actually run Actions on
> *every* branch, but introduce a new first step which stops the rest of
> the actions run (so that in practice we're not running CI on
> non-integration branches in Junio's tree).

Hmph, what are we trying to avoid by using the for-ci/ convention?

If this is only a reaction to what I said earlier (i.e. "building everything in github.com/gitster/git/ has no value to me"), then I suspect it may be an over-engineered solution to a problem that does not exist, and harms people like you. I could just go there and turn off GitHub Actions for that repository instead.

Or are there more issues being addressed with the "testing branches are opt-in, unless a pull request against git/git explicitly says it is ready to be tested" approach?