Re: [PATCH] automation: avoid duplicated builds of staging branch

[Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 02:14:14PM +0100, Andrew Cooper wrote:
> On 17/07/2023 2:09 pm, Marek Marczykowski-Górecki wrote:
> > "staging" branch is mirrored (automatically or manually) to several
> > repositories. Avoid building it several times to not waste runner
> > resources.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: Marek Marczykowski-Górecki <marmarek@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> >  .gitlab-ci.yml | 6 ++++++
> >  1 file changed, 6 insertions(+)
> >
> > diff --git a/.gitlab-ci.yml b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > index c8bd7519d5fb..c3b05e32636b 100644
> > --- a/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > +++ b/.gitlab-ci.yml
> > @@ -2,6 +2,12 @@ stages:
> >    - build
> >    - test
> >  
> > +workflow:
> > +  rules:
> > +    - if: '$CI_COMMIT_REF_NAME == "staging" && $CI_PROJECT_NAMESPACE != 
> > "xen-project"'
> > +      when: never
> > +    - when: always
> 
> If we're doing this for staging, we should include staging-* and
> stable-*.  They're all the same from this point of view.
> 
> However, this does need double checking with the committers who use
> gitlab regularly (CC'd).  This doesn't happen to interfere with my
> commit workflow (I use a separate branch called for-staging), but I
> can't talk for others.

I'd like to avoid broad patterns like staging-* or stable-* here, I'm
pretty sure people do use branches like staging-X.Y-something. While it
would be possible to exclude them by listing exact names, I'm not sure
if it's worth it, given the push frequency to them (few times a month)
and those being mirrored to less repositories (only FuSa fork?).

-- 
Best Regards,
Marek Marczykowski-Górecki
Invisible Things Lab

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature