Skip to content
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: standardise workflows using SciML's reusable workflows #289

Merged
merged 6 commits into from
Apr 23, 2024

Conversation

thazhemadam
Copy link
Member

Update the workflows in this repository to use SciML's reusable workflows.
This is part of a larger effort to standardise the SciML's CI workflows for more generic and common requirements, to keep the workflows uniform and easier to maintain.

* Standardize the tests workflow, using the reusab SciML tests workflow.
* Rename the tests workflow to `Tests.yml`, instead of `CI.yml`, since
it's more semantically correct and CI encompasses all the workflows that
are run.
@thazhemadam thazhemadam requested review from devmotion and ChrisRackauckas and removed request for devmotion April 23, 2024 14:33
thazhemadam and others added 3 commits April 23, 2024 20:09
Since we don't test with Julia 1.6 anyways, remove the exclude block.
Note: this was initially left in while the workflow was standardised to
maintain status quo (with the previous version of the workflow).
@devmotion devmotion merged commit c78ec37 into master Apr 23, 2024
10 checks passed
@devmotion devmotion deleted the at/reusable-ci-workflows branch April 23, 2024 20:38
Comment on lines +31 to +33
arch: x64
coverage: true
uses: "SciML/.github/.github/workflows/tests.yml@v1"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It's not missing a - here?

Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No, this syntax is correct, as evidenced by the workflows running as expected.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants