fix(ci): always run capybara, even when ref is not found #1630
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Briefly, what does this PR introduce?
When, for some reason, the reference artifacts on
mainare not available (typically recovering from a failingmain), then we don't generate capybara output and thebuild-docsjob fails when trying to merge the capy files. E.g. https://github.com/eic/EICrecon/actions/runs/11282255676/job/31379983435. There is no gracious "don't fail when you can't merge anything" option.This PR ensures that we always have capy files generated, even when we don't actually have a reference to compare to. The only thing that will be included if there are is reference is the new file. That's still useful information to plot.
What kind of change does this PR introduce?
Please check if this PR fulfills the following:
Does this PR introduce breaking changes? What changes might users need to make to their code?
No.
Does this PR change default behavior?
No.