Skip to content

[Backport release-25.05] workflows/{merge-group,pr}: improve "no PR failures" handling#436551

Merged
wolfgangwalther merged 3 commits intorelease-25.05from
backport-435929-to-release-25.05
Aug 24, 2025
Merged

[Backport release-25.05] workflows/{merge-group,pr}: improve "no PR failures" handling#436551
wolfgangwalther merged 3 commits intorelease-25.05from
backport-435929-to-release-25.05

Conversation

@nixpkgs-ci
Copy link
Contributor

@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot commented Aug 24, 2025

Bot-based backport to release-25.05, triggered by a label in #435929.

  • Before merging, ensure that this backport is acceptable for the release.
    • Even as a non-committer, if you find that it is not acceptable, leave a comment.

Posting the status manually allows us to avoid the strange "skipped ==
success" logic and properly skip the `unlock` job for pull_request
events in the next commit.

This should be much easier to understand than the previous logic.

(cherry picked from commit 2c25cb0)
…equest trigger

The required status checks should depend on exactly one workflow,
triggered via pull_request_target or merge_group. Anything that is
triggered by pull_request is for testing purposes of the workflows
themselves only.

(cherry picked from commit 5ff3276)
The owners check is not reproducible, because it depends on the state of
the NixOS org on GitHub. Owners can rename their accounts or they can
leave the organisation and access to Nixpkgs can be removed from teams.
All of this breaks the owners check for reasons unrelated to the PR at
hand.

This PR makes the check for the owners file conditionally required: Only
when the ci/OWNERS file is actually modified a failed check will block
merging the PR. When that's not the case, the check will still fail
visibily in the checklist, but the failure can be ignored.

This is especially relevant for the Merge Queue, which should not be
entirely blocked whenever any of these events happen.

Also, it allows passing the checks in a fork when testing, where the
owners check will *always* fail, because the respective teams and
members are never part of the "user org" that a fork is.

(cherry picked from commit 956d0a7)
@nixpkgs-ci nixpkgs-ci bot added 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux. 6.topic: continuous integration Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions 4.workflow: backport This targets a stable branch 6.topic: policy discussion Discuss policies to work in and around Nixpkgs labels Aug 24, 2025
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther merged commit 9ce09ee into release-25.05 Aug 24, 2025
65 of 67 checks passed
@wolfgangwalther wolfgangwalther deleted the backport-435929-to-release-25.05 branch August 24, 2025 20:02
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

4.workflow: backport This targets a stable branch 6.topic: continuous integration Affects continuous integration (CI) in Nixpkgs, including Ofborg and GitHub Actions 6.topic: policy discussion Discuss policies to work in and around Nixpkgs 10.rebuild-darwin: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Darwin. 10.rebuild-linux: 0 This PR does not cause any packages to rebuild on Linux.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant