-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 33
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Handle the streams repo (previously skipped) #15
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think you also want not_these_templates
to have editorconfig listed, since streams has some extra rules there.
Aha, so that's the trick. Wasn't sure how to handle the difference yet. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
LGTM. I imagine running this on whatwg/streams should produce no changes from the current master, right?
#14 was just merged, so it does, but here's the single change not related to that: diff --git a/Makefile b/Makefile
index 60a5dd7..1179275 100644
--- a/Makefile
+++ b/Makefile
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ remote: index.bs
--write-out "%{http_code}" \
--header "Accept: text/plain, text/html" \
-F die-on=warning \
- -F md-Text-Macro="COMMIT-SHA LOCAL COPY" \
+ -F md-Text-Macro="COMMIT-SHA LOCAL COPY" \
-F file=@index.bs) && \
[[ "$$HTTP_STATUS" -eq "200" ]]) || ( \
echo ""; cat index.html; echo ""; \ (A whitespace indentation change.) |
Ah, great, my bad for messing that up I guess. But if #14 was merged, then we need more work here, right? Since build.yml needs more steps for streams, namely npm install, npm test, and submodules. |
I would recommend just putting the tests in a separate workflow, and not tracking that with spec-factory. The only thing you can't do then is have the deploy on master depend on the tests passing on master, but do you want that? |
This would mean, a separate file? That seems nice, to keep things separated into "standard WHATWG stuff" and "Streams specific stuff". However, that does imply that we didn't need Node.js in any of the existing workflows after all. Maybe we should remove that.
We do not want to merge any PRs into master which make the tests fail. But I guess that could be done via branch protection? |
Yes, both of these are what I had in mind.
Ah, nice! I'll make it so. |
We won't need node because streams can have its own test worflow: #15 (comment)
We won't need node because streams can have its own test worflow: #15 (comment)
The Streams standard was indeed handled in PR whatwg#15.
The Streams standard was handled in #15.
No description provided.