Replies: 2 comments 2 replies
-
I also have this issue. For GitHub CI, when a build is trigged for a pull request, the build is run on a trial merge to the destination. See https://docs.github.com/en/actions/using-workflows/events-that-trigger-workflows#pull_request . For Travis CI, the same thing happens. See https://docs.travis-ci.com/user/pull-requests/ :
This results in two results appearing in the pull request "checks" section for each GitHub CI and Travis CI event. For example: Cirrus CI only produces one result: for the unmerged branch. The trial merge can be fetched from GitHub at Without this, we haven't seen the results of a merge before we commit to master, and have to add extra steps to our merging procedure. |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Also relevant is the brand new Merge Queue facility from GitHub, which changes things even more. See https://github.blog/changelog/2023-02-08-pull-request-merge-queue-public-beta/ |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
For many project PRs the most useful CI run is to run a test suite against the package as if the PR was merged into main. However, this doesn't seem to be the default clone setup for cirrus-ci runs where
CIRRUS_PR
is defined. ForCIRRUS_PR
runs the CI seems to be run against the PR branch itself. Is this correct?For the scipy project we've overridden the
clone_script
:Thus if one is running CI against a PR we clone the main repo, fetch the change-set for the PR, then no-commit merge the change-set into main, then run the test suite.
CIRRUS_PR
run?cc @rgommers
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions