Skip to content

Conversation

@bfops
Copy link
Collaborator

@bfops bfops commented Feb 16, 2024

Description of Changes

Added a GitHub workflow to check for PRs with a Do not merge label, for ad-hoc PR blocking.

Note: A repo admin must make this a merge-blocking check!

API and ABI breaking changes

No runtime changes.

Expected complexity level and risk

1

@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bitcraft issue Active issue for the BitCraft team label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops removed the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops removed the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added abi-break A PR that makes an ABI breaking change and removed bug Something isn't working bitcraft issue Active issue for the BitCraft team labels Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added release-0.9 and removed bug Something isn't working abi-break A PR that makes an ABI breaking change labels Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops removed the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops added the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops removed the bug Something isn't working label Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops marked this pull request as ready for review February 16, 2024 22:28
@bfops bfops added release-any To be landed in any release window and removed release-0.9 labels Feb 16, 2024
@bfops bfops requested a review from jdetter February 16, 2024 22:38
contains(github.event.pull_request.labels.*.name, 'breaking change')
run: |
echo "This is a breaking change."
exit 1
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I made these all steps instead of e.g. different jobs because it cluttered up the list of checks in the PR view, but I don't feel strongly about it if there's a better organization.


jobs:
label_checks:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

should this always be spacetimedb-runner?

It seemed like that always forced the jobs onto a queue, even for these runs that don't require anything fancy.

Copy link
Collaborator

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, generally the spacetimedb-runner is going to be much faster compared to the regular github ubuntu-latest runner, but for things like this its fine to just use the github runner.

@bfops bfops added the no runtime change This change does not affect the final binaries label Feb 20, 2024
Copy link
Collaborator

@jdetter jdetter left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

LGTM

@bfops bfops added this pull request to the merge queue Feb 22, 2024
Merged via the queue into master with commit 3357d83 Feb 22, 2024
@bfops bfops deleted the bfops/deny-merge-labels branch September 5, 2024 17:49
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

no runtime change This change does not affect the final binaries release-any To be landed in any release window

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants