Confusing icon for skipped actions

[bilogic]

Description

If an action was skipped, it gets a green tick on the Closed page

But on the code page, it gets a cross

Maybe a red bent arrow like a missed phone call will be better, see below?

Gitea Version

1.19.0

Can you reproduce the bug on the Gitea demo site?

No

Log Gist

No response

Screenshots

No response

Git Version

No response

Operating System

No response

How are you running Gitea?

Using docker

Database

MySQL

[silverwind]

Does octicons have something suitable?

[bilogic]

@silverwind

They use this to represent skip https://primer.github.io/octicons/skip-24

But I think the ones I googled convey meaning better.. I'm in a dilemma myself over the bent arrow or over the empty box

Anyway, the issue is the inconsistent icon, if it is easier to just use https://primer.github.io/octicons/skip-24, then it would also solve the problem.

[silverwind]

We use only 16px, so it'd be https://primer.github.io/octicons/skip-16

[wolfogre]

Related to Duplicated with #23599.

The point is that there is no skipped for commit status, and it has been treated as success in #23786

[silverwind]

Shouldn't we not use octicon-skip?

[bilogic]

@wolfogre

Thanks, I understand gitea's approach of following github entirely, but also gave this some thought:

It's pretty confusing to:

1. Show the commit status icon + commit message on the actions page

2. But show action status icon + commit message on the code page

3. Since the intention on code page is to show the last commit, it should stay the same regardless whether actions are enabled or not

4. Instead of prefixing the action status icon to the commit message, I feel it is better to append that icon to the commit message followed by the job name, which is consistent on the actions page
   

5. Based on my OP, that would be

   c001449e78 updated action X linux_tests

   where X is the icon, and linux_tests is the job name, which is what is shown when hovering over the code page's action status icon today

I can elaborate with more images if the above is not clear.

[wolfogre]

Shouldn't we not use octicon-skip?

I have no objection to using a better icon to replace

But I don't think it is the point.

[wolfogre]

@bilogic Sorry I'm confused.

1. Show the commit status icon + commit message on the actions page

I think it's action status icon + commit message on the actions page now

2. But show action status icon + commit message on the code page

I think it's commit status icon + commit message on the code page now

3. Since the intention on code page is to show the last commit, it should stay the same regardless whether actions are enabled or not

Sorry, what do you mean by "should stay the same"? The commit status could be used even without Actions.

4. Instead of prefixing the action status icon to the commit message, I feel it is better to append that icon to the commit message followed by the job name, which is consistent on the actions page
   

"prefixing the action status icon to the commit message", could you show me where?

---

Update:

To be clear.

When those are commit status with commit status icons.

And those are actions status with actions status icons.

[bilogic]

@wolfogre yes thanks, let me show you what i'm seeing here

This is code page when actions are disabled: hash + commit message (No icons)

When actions are enabled and have ran, code page inserts an icon (red): hash + iconRed + commit message

On actions page, we see a different icon (blue): iconBlue + commit message

Clicking into the commit message, we see a 3rd different icon (green): iconGreen + job_name

so what I'm trying to ask here is:

1. Can we make all 3 icons the same, based on the Completed job?

2. To put it in context of my OP (skipped job), it currently shows iconGreen + job_name. Why not also make iconBlue and iconRed show the same icon consistently?

3. I also wondered, how many statuses does a git commit have? There are no icon/status when actions are disabled. And for me, it is either a committed or could not commit, and if it could not be committed, there are actually no records of it in git. So why do we have commit icon/status now? Could it actually be something else? Thus, my suggestion to place this icon elsewhere instead of prepending to the commit message

4. Now, I must say, I'm very new to actions, I tried hard to see if I missed any scenarios, but could not come up with much.

Open to hearing if the current icons represents something I might have missed. Thank you!

[wolfogre]

Thank you for your explanation, I think I understand now.

1. Can we make all 3 icons the same, based on the Completed job?

• It is commit status, it not for Actions only, any external CI system can create commit status via Gitea API. So we shouldn't touch its design for Actions.
• It should be actions status, but the icon is wrong, it should be the same as the third.
• It's commit status.

So I will make the second and third icons the same. But the first icons are for commit status which is a different thing.

2. To put it in context of my OP (skipped job), it currently shows iconGreen + job_name. Why not also make iconBlue and iconRed show the same icon consistently?

As mentioned, iconBlue should show the same icon with iconGreen, but iconRed is for a different thing.

3. I also wondered, how many statuses does a git commit have?

Commit status:

• pending
• success
• error
• failure
• warning
• running

Actions status:

• unknown
• waiting
• running
• success
• failure
• cancelled
• skipped
• blocked

And how Gitea map them:

actions status		commit status
success, skipped	→	success
failure, cancelled	→	failure
waiting, blocked	→	pending
running	→	running

So I would say they are different things.

There are no icon/status when actions are disabled.

The commit statuses are for binding CICD results to commits, and Gitea Actions is just one of the CICD tools; other tools, like DroneCI, could also send commit statuses. In other words, if you don't enable any CICD tools, there won't be any commit statuses.

And for me, it is either a committed or could not commit, and if it could not be committed, there are actually no records of it in git. So why do we have commit icon/status now? Could it actually be something else?

You may have misunderstood, the commit status is not for whether the branch can be committed. It is mainly for "Branch Protection", like:

Thus, my suggestion to place this icon elsewhere instead of prepending to the commit message

I don't understand, I mean, GitHub does it this way too.

[bilogic]

any external CI system can create commit status via Gitea API

@wolfogre ok thanks, I have little to no understanding of the above. But since it is a thing, I'm sure you guys know better than me.