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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Make sure bors success depends on metadata_collection #9070

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jun 30, 2022
Merged

Make sure bors success depends on metadata_collection #9070

merged 1 commit into from
Jun 30, 2022

Conversation

flip1995
Copy link
Member

@flip1995 flip1995 commented Jun 30, 2022 •
edited
Loading

r? @xFrednet

Currently bors runs the metadata_collection but merges before the run is finished, because the bors success dummy step didn't depend on it. This also makes sure that the metadata_collection test is run at the same time as the other base runs to not produce overhead.

changelog: none

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties label Jun 30, 2022
@flip1995
Copy link
Member Author

@bors try

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 30, 2022

⌛ Trying commit a131cea with merge 4a3d128...

bors added a commit that referenced this pull request Jun 30, 2022
@bors
Auto merge of #9070 - flip1995:ci-fix, r=<try>
4a3d128 
Make sure bors success depends on metadata_collection

r? `@xFrednet`

Currently bors runs the `metadata_collection` but merges before the run is finished, because the bors success dummy step didn't depend on it. This also makes sure that the `metadata_collection` test is run at the same time as the other build/test runs to not produce overhead.

changelog: none
@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 30, 2022

☀️ Try build successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Build commit: 4a3d128 (4a3d128ce5aec63019c809cf82c02af858e3f967)

@xFrednet
Copy link
Member

Woops, nice catch. I'm still learning CI stuff. Thank you!!

Sir bors, I formally declare this PR as r+ed

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 30, 2022

📌 Commit a131cea has been approved by xFrednet

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 30, 2022

⌛ Testing commit a131cea with merge 6206d2a...

@bors
Copy link
Contributor

bors commented Jun 30, 2022

☀️ Test successful - checks-action_dev_test, checks-action_remark_test, checks-action_test
Approved by: xFrednet
Pushing 6206d2a to master...

@bors bors merged commit 6206d2a into rust-lang:master Jun 30, 2022
@flip1995 flip1995 deleted the ci-fix branch June 30, 2022 11:46
@flip1995
Copy link
Member Author

Sir bors, I formally declare this PR as r+ed

How did that work? What happened here? 🤯

@xFrednet
Copy link
Member

A magician should never reveal their hand 😂 The trick is that bots ignore HTML comments. If you look at the comment text it included a hidden r+. It was something I thought about on the spot, and find it hilarious. I might adapt that from now on 😂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@xFrednet xFrednet xFrednet approved these changes

Assignees

@xFrednet xFrednet

Labels
S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
4 participants
@flip1995 @bors @xFrednet @rust-highfive