Move change detection to separate workflow in CI#122336
Conversation
7bd7ef5 to
c994611
Compare
c994611 to
2e5131d
Compare
|
It was already in its own job: This PR: Would it be more accurate to say this moves the job to its own workflow + file? Benefits:
Costs:
|
Yes, you're right. I must've phrased it better.
I think these benefits have a significant impact on their own. This also contributes to the separation of the structure / triggers vs. implementation details. In the future, it makes it cleaner to add more jobs (or separate what's in there already) if the need be. I feel like it currently computes several things that aren't necessarily related enough to be in the same job.
Yes, you're right. I suppose, we could add names to those reusable workflows with something along the lines of “Don't click”. Combined with pinning the entry-point workflows, that would make it look nicer. Personally, I'm not too worried about these, but I see how some of the points may annoy people. Additionally, it may make sense to hit GitHub support with a request to hide workflows that only have a P.S. Regarding having a nested entry in the sidebar — I don't expect that many people would need to click on that, so it'll remain collapsed and green most of the time, not really affecting anyone on the scale. |
|
@picnixz this also needs backport labels FYI |
|
Yes, I agree on balance this makes it things a bit clearer. Thanks! |
(cherry picked from commit e60ee11) Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko (Святослав Сидоренко) <[email protected]>
|
Sorry, @webknjaz and @hugovk, I could not cleanly backport this to |
|
GH-122510 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.13 branch. |
…122510) Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko (Святослав Сидоренко) <[email protected]>
). (cherry picked from commit e60ee11) Co-authored-by: Sviatoslav Sydorenko (Святослав Сидоренко) <[email protected]>
|
GH-122538 is a backport of this pull request to the 3.12 branch. |



This is a continuation of the CI refactoring PR series I've been doing.