On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 12:23:11PM -0400, Jeff King wrote: > On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 10:49:31PM +0700, Đoàn Trần Công Danh wrote: > > > diff --git a/.github/workflows/main.yml b/.github/workflows/main.yml > > index fd4df939b5..ea43b03092 100644 > > --- a/.github/workflows/main.yml > > +++ b/.github/workflows/main.yml > > @@ -1,6 +1,18 @@ > > name: CI/PR > > > > -on: [push, pull_request] > > +on: > > + pull_request: > > + branches: > > + - '**' > > Doing "**" here makes sense to catch everything (it would be even better > if we could just say "everything with a pull request" by omitting the > branch filter entirely, but maybe that's not possible). > > > + tags: > > + - '*' > > Would we want that here, too? I guess nobody is likely to push > "foo/v1.2.3". > > Or on the flip side, would we want to tighten this? If I push a tag > "wip", I probably don't want it built. Probably the right rule is > "annotated tags only", but I suspect that's not possible. > > > + push: > > + branches: > > + - maint > > + - master > > + - next > > + - jch > > + - pu > > What happened to "for-ci" (presumably "for-ci/**")? 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). I figure that we need something more flexible than the 'push.branches' list, but I'd be very curious to hear if something like what I'm describing is possible. > -Peff Thanks, Taylor
