Change the order of flags in github actions workflows. #1906
Conversation
|
@weppos I think we'll need this PR in soon so we can keep up with the tld-update workflow. |
|
Why is there a rush?
…On Mon, Nov 27, 2023, 11:46 AM Amir Omidi ***@***.***> wrote:
@weppos <https://github.com/weppos> I think we'll need this PR in soon so
we can keep up with the tld-update workflow.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1906 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJLHNIVVX4HUBRM7FNLYGTU2NAVCNFSM6AAAAAA74QAFH2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMRYGQ4TKNJQHA>
.
You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message
ID: ***@***.***>
|
|
I accidentally introduced a bug in #1901 to the github worklow: list/.github/workflows/tld-update.yml Line 29 in 2d1427a This caused the last tld-update run to fail: https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/actions/runs/7006982080/job/19060050437 This PR fixes that so we don't have this failure on the next run. |
|
Ah, ok I was wondering why Comcast's TLDs didn't get removed.
…On Mon, Nov 27, 2023, 2:03 PM Amir Omidi ***@***.***> wrote:
I accidentally introduced a bug in #1901
<#1901> to the github worklow:
https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/blob/2d1427a99ee0c3eef8b22d06c4d7099200ed41ac/.github/workflows/tld-update.yml#L29
This caused the last tld-update run to fail:
https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/actions/runs/7006982080/job/19060050437
This PR fixes that so we don't have this failure on the next run.
—
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#1906 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AACQTJPRZU32RSBPVUVZI63YGUE4NAVCNFSM6AAAAAA74QAFH2VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTQMRYGY4TKNZTGM>
.
You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID:
***@***.***>
|
| @@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ jobs: | |||
| go-version: 'stable' | |||
|
|
|||
| - name: Run Go unit tests | |||
| run: go test -C ./tools . | |||
| run: go test -C ./tools -v . | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Out of curiosity, any reason to not have:
| run: go test -C ./tools -v . | |
| run: cd ./tools && go test -v ./... |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Instead of chaining a cd, what about using the working-directory job config element?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I don't have a strong opinion on how this is done. Up to maintainers to decide this.
I do have a preference for using the tools that Go has built in to the toolchain.
My main opinion is this is currently breaking the pipeline, so either we rollback #1901, or we accept this as is and revisit it if the need arises?
weppos
added
the
non .dat Change or Coding Review
Mistake introduced in #1901
Fixes https://github.com/publicsuffix/list/actions/runs/7006982080/job/19060050437