All of lore.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Taylor Blau <me@ttaylorr.com>
To: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
Cc: "Junio C Hamano" <gitster@pobox.com>,
	"Taylor Blau" <me@ttaylorr.com>,
	"Đoàn Trần Công Danh" <congdanhqx@gmail.com>,
	git@vger.kernel.org, "Jeff Hostetler" <jeffhost@microsoft.com>,
	"Johannes Schindelin" <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions
Date: Thu, 7 May 2020 11:00:42 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20200507170042.GC26677@syl.local> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20200507162011.GA3638906@coredump.intra.peff.net>

Hi Peff,

On Thu, May 07, 2020 at 12:20:11PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
> On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 05:04:51PM -0400, Jeff King wrote:
>
> > Subject: [PATCH] ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions
>
> Here's a "v2" of that patch based on the discussion.

I really like this direction. I think that it's a good mix of
flexibility and convenience. I'm happy to push a one-time 'ci-config'
branch to 'ttaylorr/git' and forget about it.

> I think it smooths some of the rough edges of the orphan-branch
> approach, while still having a cost on par with other suggestions (or at
> least ones that truly allow any config; we can check for "for-ci/**" or
> something very cheaply, but that implies hard-coding it for everybody).
> I think the cost here is acceptable, and it gives us room to add more
> features in the future.
>
> If Actions eventually adds per-repo variable storage that can be used in
> "if:" conditionals, then we could eventually switch to that. :)
>
> The documentation here should be enough to let people work with it. But
> we'd probably want to take Danh's patch to mention Actions in
> SubmittingPatches on top (and it possibly could be modified to point to
> the ci/config directory).
>
> -- >8 --
> Subject: [PATCH] ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions
>
> Depending on the workflows of individual developers, it can either be
> convenient or annoying that our GitHub Actions CI jobs are run on every
> branch. As an example of annoying: if you carry many half-finished
> work-in-progress branches and rebase them frequently against master,
> you'd get tons of failure reports that aren't interesting (not to
> mention the wasted CPU).
>
> This commit adds a new job which checks a special branch within the
> repository for CI config, and then runs a shell script it finds there to
> decide whether to skip the rest of the tests. The default will continue
> to run tests for all refs if that branch or script is missing.
>
> There have been a few alternatives discussed:
>
> One option is to carry information in the commit itself about whether it
> should be tested, either in the tree itself (changing the workflow YAML
> file) or in the commit message (a "[skip ci]" flag or similar). But
> these are frustrating and error-prone to use:
>
>   - you have to manually apply them to each branch that you want to mark
>
>   - it's easy for them to leak into other workflows, like emailing patches
>
> We could likewise try to get some information from the branch name. But
> that leads to debates about whether the default should be "off" or "on",
> and overriding still ends up somewhat awkward. If we default to "on",
> you have to remember to name your branches appropriately to skip CI. And
> if "off", you end up having to contort your branch names or duplicate
> your pushes with an extra refspec.
>
> By comparison, this commit's solution lets you specify your config once
> and forget about it, and all of the data is off in its own ref, where it
> can be changed by individual forks without touching the main tree.
>
> There were a few design decisions that came out of on-list discussion.
> I'll summarize here:
>
>  - we could use GitHub's API to retrieve the config ref, rather than a
>    real checkout (and then just operate on it via some javascript). We
>    still have to spin up a VM and contact GitHub over the network from
>    it either way, so it ends up not being much faster. I opted to go
>    with shell to keep things similar to our other tools (and really
>    could implement allow-refs in any language you want). This also makes
>    it easy to test your script locally, and to modify it within the
>    context of a normal git.git tree.
>
>  - we could keep the well-known refname out of refs/heads/ to avoid
>    cluttering the branch namespace. But that makes it awkward to
>    manipulate. By contrast, you can just "git checkout ci-config" to
>    make changes.
>
>  - we could assume the ci-config ref has nothing in it except config
>    (i.e., a branch unrelated to the rest of git.git). But dealing with
>    orphan branches is awkward. Instead, we'll do our best to efficiently
>    check out only the ci/config directory using a shallow partial clone,
>    which allows your ci-config branch to be just a normal branch, with
>    your config changes on top.
>
>  - we could provide a simpler interface, like a static list of ref
>    patterns. But we can't get out of spinning up a whole VM anyway, so
>    we might as well use that feature to make the config as flexible as
>    possible. If we add more config, we should be able to reuse our
>    partial-clone to set more outputs.
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeff King <peff@peff.net>
> ---
>  .github/workflows/main.yml  | 42 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  ci/config/allow-refs.sample | 26 +++++++++++++++++++++++
>  2 files changed, 68 insertions(+)
>  create mode 100755 ci/config/allow-refs.sample
>
> diff --git a/.github/workflows/main.yml b/.github/workflows/main.yml
> index fd4df939b5..802a4bf7cd 100644
> --- a/.github/workflows/main.yml
> +++ b/.github/workflows/main.yml
> @@ -6,7 +6,39 @@ env:
>    DEVELOPER: 1
>
>  jobs:
> +  ci-config:
> +      runs-on: ubuntu-latest
> +      outputs:
> +        enabled: ${{ steps.check-ref.outputs.enabled }}
> +      steps:
> +        - name: try to clone ci-config branch
> +          continue-on-error: true
> +          run: |
> +            git -c protocol.version=2 clone \
> +              --no-tags \
> +              --single-branch \
> +              -b ci-config \
> +              --depth 1 \
> +              --no-checkout \
> +              --filter=blob:none \
> +              https://github.com/${{ github.repository }} \
> +              config-repo &&
> +              cd config-repo &&
> +              git checkout HEAD -- ci/config
> +        - id: check-ref
> +          name: check whether CI is enabled for ref
> +          run: |
> +            enabled=yes
> +            if test -x config-repo/ci/config/allow-ref &&
> +               ! config-repo/ci/config/allow-ref '${{ github.ref }}'
> +            then
> +              enabled=no
> +            fi
> +            echo "::set-output name=enabled::$enabled"
> +
>    windows-build:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'

One thing I wonder is whether the downstream 'windows-test' partitions.
I think that it should be fine, since we won't run the dependent
'windows-build', and then 'windows-test' won't have all of its
prerequisites filled.

>      runs-on: windows-latest
>      steps:
>      - uses: actions/checkout@v1
> @@ -70,6 +102,8 @@ jobs:
>          name: failed-tests-windows
>          path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
>    vs-build:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
>      env:
>        MSYSTEM: MINGW64
>        NO_PERL: 1
> @@ -154,6 +188,8 @@ jobs:
>                            ${{matrix.nr}} 10 t[0-9]*.sh)
>          "@
>    regular:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
>      strategy:
>        matrix:
>          vector:
> @@ -189,6 +225,8 @@ jobs:
>          name: failed-tests-${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
>          path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
>    dockerized:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
>      strategy:
>        matrix:
>          vector:
> @@ -213,6 +251,8 @@ jobs:
>          name: failed-tests-${{matrix.vector.jobname}}
>          path: ${{env.FAILED_TEST_ARTIFACTS}}
>    static-analysis:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
>      env:
>        jobname: StaticAnalysis
>      runs-on: ubuntu-latest
> @@ -221,6 +261,8 @@ jobs:
>      - run: ci/install-dependencies.sh
>      - run: ci/run-static-analysis.sh
>    documentation:
> +    needs: ci-config
> +    if: needs.ci-config.outputs.enabled == 'yes'
>      env:
>        jobname: Documentation
>      runs-on: ubuntu-latest
> diff --git a/ci/config/allow-refs.sample b/ci/config/allow-refs.sample
> new file mode 100755
> index 0000000000..f157f1945a
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/ci/config/allow-refs.sample
> @@ -0,0 +1,26 @@
> +#!/bin/sh
> +#
> +# Sample script for enabling/disabling GitHub Actions CI runs on
> +# particular refs. By default, CI is run for all branches pushed to
> +# GitHub. You can override this by dropping the ".sample" from the script,
> +# editing it, committing, and pushing the result to the "ci-config" branch of
> +# your repository:
> +#
> +#   git checkout -b ci-config

Should we be recommending '--orphan' instead of '-b' here? It looks
like when you clone this branch down that you try to get as few bytes as
possible, so I figure it may be easier to have this be a orphaned
branch.

> +#   cp allow-refs.sample allow-refs
> +#   $EDITOR allow-refs
> +#   git commit -am "implement my ci preferences"
> +#   git push
> +#
> +# This script will then be run when any refs are pushed to that repository. It
> +# gets the fully qualified refname as the first argument, and should exit with
> +# success only for refs for which you want to run CI.
> +
> +case "$1" in
> +# allow one-off tests by pushing to "for-ci" or "for-ci/mybranch"
> +refs/heads/for-ci*) true ;;
> +# always build your integration branch
> +refs/heads/my-integration-branch) true ;;
> +# don't build any other branches or tags
> +*) false ;;
> +esac
> --
> 2.26.2.1005.ge383644752
>

Thanks,
Taylor

  reply	other threads:[~2020-05-07 17:00 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 62+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2020-05-02 15:08 [PATCH] ci: respect the [skip ci] convention in our GitHub workflow "CI/PR" Johannes Schindelin via GitGitGadget
2020-05-03  9:36 ` Jeff King
2020-05-03 12:05   ` Danh Doan
2020-05-04 15:01     ` Jeff King
2020-05-04 15:49       ` [PATCH v2 0/2] Limit GitHub Actions to designated branches Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-04 15:49         ` [PATCH v2 1/2] CI: limit " Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-04 16:23           ` Jeff King
2020-05-04 21:58             ` Taylor Blau
2020-05-04 22:52               ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-04 23:15                 ` Taylor Blau
2020-05-04 23:35                   ` Jeff King
2020-05-05  0:24                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-04 23:36               ` Jeff King
2020-05-05  0:20                 ` Taylor Blau
2020-05-05 16:43                   ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 17:57                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-05 18:24                       ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 21:04                         ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 21:29                           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-05 21:58                             ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 22:28                               ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-06 15:09                             ` Johannes Schindelin
2020-05-06 16:26                               ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 12:17                                 ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 14:02                                   ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 18:17                                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 12:01                               ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-07 12:47                                 ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-06  0:46                           ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-06  3:56                             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-06 14:25                               ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-06 16:31                                 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 12:25                                   ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 18:29                                     ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 18:54                                       ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 19:33                                         ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 16:20                           ` [PATCH v2] ci: allow per-branch config for GitHub Actions Jeff King
2020-05-07 17:00                             ` Taylor Blau [this message]
2020-05-07 17:18                               ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 19:53                             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-07 20:46                               ` Jeff King
2020-05-07 21:58                                 ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-08 18:00                                   ` Jeff King
2020-05-09  1:23                                     ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05  0:34             ` [PATCH v2 1/2] CI: limit GitHub Actions to designated branches Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-04 15:49         ` [PATCH v2 2/2] SubmittingPatches: advertise GitHub Actions CI Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-04 16:37           ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-05  0:46             ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 16:26         ` [PATCH v3 0/3] Provide option to opt in/out GitHub Actions Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 16:26           ` [PATCH v3 1/3] SubmittingPatches: advertise GitHub Actions CI Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 16:47             ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 16:59               ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 17:07                 ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 16:26           ` [PATCH v3 2/3] CI: limit GitHub Actions to designated branches Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 16:51             ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 17:05               ` Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 17:11                 ` Jeff King
2020-05-05 18:49             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-05 16:26           ` [PATCH v3 3/3] fixup! " Đoàn Trần Công Danh
2020-05-05 18:59             ` Junio C Hamano
2020-05-05 17:01           ` [PATCH v3 0/3] Provide option to opt in/out GitHub Actions Jeff King
2020-05-03 16:46   ` [PATCH] ci: respect the [skip ci] convention in our GitHub workflow "CI/PR" Junio C Hamano

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20200507170042.GC26677@syl.local \
    --to=me@ttaylorr.com \
    --cc=congdanhqx@gmail.com \
    --cc=git@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=gitster@pobox.com \
    --cc=jeffhost@microsoft.com \
    --cc=johannes.schindelin@gmx.de \
    --cc=peff@peff.net \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.