-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 629
ci: Add workflow to regenerate static assets #1457
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
ci: Add workflow to regenerate static assets #1457
Conversation
|
@TwiN We can start thinking about how to test/introduce this properly. Does the current version already cover all the needs for this repo? I don't want to make it more complicated than it needs to be. The issue with testing is that the workflow trigger |
|
There's no need to test this. I'll manually test it once it's merged in the master branch, and make adjustments as necessary. |
|
There are still two open questions I have:
The restriction to require reviews required probably makes sense and if reviews are required the restriction to only allow non-draft PRs makes sense too since draft PRs can not be approved, I think. |
|
Yes for the former, no for the latter. Does this currently not work for draft PRs? |
The default for the action is not to allow it. I enabled it now. Have I understood correctly: The wanted behavior is like this? allow_drafts: true
skip_ci: true # Meaning CI check do not need to pass to allow updating static assets
skip_reviews: false # Meaning there needs to be a review before updating static assets is allowedIf any conditions fail the action will add a comment to the PR explaining which condition is not met, e.g PythonGermany#23 (comment) |
|
Just tested it again, in my fork it works just as intended: PythonGermany#18 (comment) |
TwiN
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Excellent work, @PythonGermany!
|
@PythonGermany To answer your questions, it seems to be perfectly configured as-is in your branch |
|
Great to hear. If there are any issues let me know! |
Summary
Closes #1454. This workflow will never work if the pull request author has set the PR option
Allow edits and access to secrets by maintainersto false.I am currently not sure how to easily test if the permissions are given to push to the feature branch of the PR in the forked repo when the workflow runs in the base repo.
If there are no checkout or push permission issues the workflow works. I already tested it with PRs in my fork with the base in the same repository.
TODO
Checklist
README.md, if applicable.