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

bump paths-filter version and use setting #1455

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 16, 2024

Conversation

johnclary
Copy link
Member

@johnclary johnclary commented May 16, 2024

Associated issues

The paths-filter docs has an example called Long lived branches: Detect changes against the most recent commit on the same branch before the push that covers the behavior that i think we want, by adding base: ${{ github.ref }} to our settings.

Testing

I think we need to merge this to master and then prod. Got any better ideas?


Ship list

  • Check migrations for any conflicts with latest migrations in master branch
  • Confirm Hasura role permissions for necessary access
  • Code reviewed
  • Product manager approved

Copy link
Member

@frankhereford frankhereford left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't have any better ideas John, I think your deployment makes sense to me, and at worst, once it's in both places, if we're not satisfied that it's tested sufficiently, we'll be in a place where we can test more easily.

🚢🚢🚢

id: changes
with:
base: ${{ github.ref }}
Copy link
Member

@frankhereford frankhereford May 16, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Ah, the magic. Thank you and @chiaberry and everyone for y'all's insight in this. I was struggling to understand all the moving parts of this git operation and what was going on, to say the least. 🙏

Copy link
Contributor

@mddilley mddilley left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I say YOLO 🚀 🚢 The config makes sense to me, and I agree that merging from master to prod sounds like a good way to test this! 🧪

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

thanks for adding this 🙏

@mddilley
Copy link
Contributor

mddilley commented May 16, 2024

@johnclary actually, i assumed that you are going to PR this into prod like a patch after merging this one. Does that match up with what you are thinking?

@johnclary
Copy link
Member Author

@mddilley not exactly what i was thinking but that's a great idea 🙏

thanks @chiaberry for untangling what was going on with this issue!!

Copy link
Member

@chiaberry chiaberry left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

long live the branch!

@johnclary johnclary merged commit 3c4c3df into master May 16, 2024
9 checks passed
johnclary added a commit that referenced this pull request May 16, 2024
…ilter-update

Patch github action paths-filter in prod (companion to #1455)
@johnclary johnclary deleted the 17354-jc-gh-action-paths-filter-update branch May 17, 2024 00:46
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.

4 participants