ci: Ignore failures of pathogen-repo-ci builds for now #150
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
This makes them advisory-only, as they're currently broken.¹ We may also opt to leave them advisory-only longer term, as they might be noisy and not fit for stopping an image release. Idea for the pass thru this uses from @joverlee521.² Related-to: <#148> ¹ <#148 (comment)> ² <#148 (comment)>
tsibley
force-pushed
the
trs/pathogen-repo-ci/continue-on-error
branch
from
2812381
to
bc22a0b
Compare
|
Merging to fix broken CI. |
1 task
tsibley
added a commit
to nextstrain/conda-base
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2023
[ Commit message based on that of 12000a20 in nextstrain/docker-base.¹ Code changes also based on that commit, plus subsequent commits.² ] A useful check for if new packages will break our pathogen builds. I included all pathogen repos that already use our pathogen-repo-ci reusable workflow. It should be minimal effort to maintain this list over time—I expect it to only grow—but perhaps in the future we will want to abstract it out into a shared list of known pathogen repos. I don't like that we have to copy the build-args for a few of the repos here since it'll be easy for this copy to diverge from the repo's authoritative build-args, but it's necessary for now. Over time as we work towards increased automation of pathogen builds, I think we can get rid of this build-args copy by further standardizing how each repo configures itself for automation. For example, instead of specifying build-args in a repo's CI workflow, the args for CI could be stored in a broader workflow metadata file (e.g. nextstrain-workflow.yaml) read by pathogen-repo-ci, or defined by some other convention. An alternative to directly running pathogen-repo-ci against each repo here would be instead triggering the CI workflows themselves within each repo. The downside to that is it would divorce the outcomes of those workflows from this one and render them not visible from PRs in this repo. It would also require updates to each repo to support triggering and passing in of additional parameters (i.e. for the package). And finally those CI workflows sometimes run other jobs, like linting and other integration tests (e.g. with Cram), that aren't always necessary to run with a new package. Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#148> Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#150> Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#151> ¹ <nextstrain/docker-base@12000a20> ² <nextstrain/docker-base@bc22a0bc> <nextstrain/docker-base@0a20a474> <nextstrain/docker-base@75254e92>
1 task
tsibley
added a commit
to nextstrain/conda-base
that referenced
this pull request
May 11, 2023
[ Commit message based on that of 12000a20 in nextstrain/docker-base.¹ Code changes also based on that commit, plus subsequent commits.² ] A useful check for if new packages will break our pathogen builds. I included all pathogen repos that already use our pathogen-repo-ci reusable workflow. It should be minimal effort to maintain this list over time—I expect it to only grow—but perhaps in the future we will want to abstract it out into a shared list of known pathogen repos. I don't like that we have to copy the build-args for a few of the repos here since it'll be easy for this copy to diverge from the repo's authoritative build-args, but it's necessary for now. Over time as we work towards increased automation of pathogen builds, I think we can get rid of this build-args copy by further standardizing how each repo configures itself for automation. For example, instead of specifying build-args in a repo's CI workflow, the args for CI could be stored in a broader workflow metadata file (e.g. nextstrain-workflow.yaml) read by pathogen-repo-ci, or defined by some other convention. An alternative to directly running pathogen-repo-ci against each repo here would be instead triggering the CI workflows themselves within each repo. The downside to that is it would divorce the outcomes of those workflows from this one and render them not visible from PRs in this repo. It would also require updates to each repo to support triggering and passing in of additional parameters (i.e. for the package). And finally those CI workflows sometimes run other jobs, like linting and other integration tests (e.g. with Cram), that aren't always necessary to run with a new package. Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#148> Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#150> Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#151> Related-to: <nextstrain/docker-base#154> ¹ <nextstrain/docker-base@12000a20> ² <nextstrain/docker-base@bc22a0bc> <nextstrain/docker-base@0a20a474> <nextstrain/docker-base@75254e92>
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.
This makes them advisory-only, as they're currently broken.¹
We may also opt to leave them advisory-only longer term, as they might
be noisy and not fit for stopping an image release.
Idea for the pass thru this uses from @joverlee521.²
Related-to: #148
¹ #148 (comment)
² #148 (comment)
Testing
Before merge
tmp!commit