Skip to content
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

Prevent running certain workflows on forks #3773

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
Feb 9, 2024
Merged

Conversation

AetherUnbound
Copy link
Collaborator

Fixes

Fixes #3693 by @AetherUnbound

Description

This PR prevents the following workflows from running on forks:

  • generate_pot.yml
  • issue_automations.yml
  • label_sync.yml
  • pr_automations.yml
  • pr_automations_init.yml
  • pr_ping.yml
  • project_thread_update_reminders.yml
  • release-app.yml
  • renovate.yml
  • subscribe_to_label.yml
  • sync_meta.yml
  • weekly_updates.yml

Testing Instructions

Merge and find out!

Checklist

  • My pull request has a descriptive title (not a vague title likeUpdate index.md).
  • My pull request targets the default branch of the repository (main) or a parent feature branch.
  • My commit messages follow best practices.
  • My code follows the established code style of the repository.
  • I added or updated tests for the changes I made (if applicable).
  • I added or updated documentation (if applicable).
  • I tried running the project locally and verified that there are no visible errors.
  • I ran the DAG documentation generator (if applicable).

Developer Certificate of Origin

Developer Certificate of Origin
Developer Certificate of Origin
Version 1.1

Copyright (C) 2004, 2006 The Linux Foundation and its contributors.
1 Letterman Drive
Suite D4700
San Francisco, CA, 94129

Everyone is permitted to copy and distribute verbatim copies of this
license document, but changing it is not allowed.


Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1

By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

(a) The contribution was created in whole or in part by me and I
    have the right to submit it under the open source license
    indicated in the file; or

(b) The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best
    of my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate open source
    license and I have the right under that license to submit that
    work with modifications, whether created in whole or in part
    by me, under the same open source license (unless I am
    permitted to submit under a different license), as indicated
    in the file; or

(c) The contribution was provided directly to me by some other
    person who certified (a), (b) or (c) and I have not modified
    it.

(d) I understand and agree that this project and the contribution
    are public and that a record of the contribution (including all
    personal information I submit with it, including my sign-off) is
    maintained indefinitely and may be redistributed consistent with
    this project or the open source license(s) involved.

@AetherUnbound AetherUnbound requested a review from a team as a code owner February 8, 2024 21:28
@github-actions github-actions bot added the 🧱 stack: mgmt Related to repo management and automations label Feb 8, 2024
@openverse-bot openverse-bot added 🟨 priority: medium Not blocking but should be addressed soon 🛠 goal: fix Bug fix 🤖 aspect: dx Concerns developers' experience with the codebase labels Feb 8, 2024
Copy link
Member

@dhruvkb dhruvkb left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! While adding the if in some cases seems unnecessary (like release-app.yml which is dispatch-only), there is no drawback in having the check. Also great that it checks the owner instead of the repo name so the changes will work for the infra repo too when synced!

One small non-blocking request though, is that I think it would be nice to have some documentation on why these checks are present in the code.

Copy link
Collaborator

@sarayourfriend sarayourfriend left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM! +1 to Dhruv's request for documentation, but non-blocking. It is kind of tedius to need to document it everywhere, and I don't know if documenting it in the CI/CD docs is discoverable... I wish it were easier (possible?) to template and DRY these yaml files 😮‍💨

@AetherUnbound
Copy link
Collaborator Author

Thanks for the quick review folks, and no worries! I can add comments in the same places 😄

@AetherUnbound AetherUnbound merged commit e98f7e9 into main Feb 9, 2024
38 checks passed
@AetherUnbound AetherUnbound deleted the fix/no-run-on-forks branch February 9, 2024 17:04
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
🤖 aspect: dx Concerns developers' experience with the codebase 🛠 goal: fix Bug fix 🟨 priority: medium Not blocking but should be addressed soon 🧱 stack: mgmt Related to repo management and automations
Projects
Archived in project
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Prevent workflows specific to this repo and its management from running on forks
4 participants