🛠️ Journal: Test only the Journal in CI
#12
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
zspencer
changed the title
Journal: Test only the `Journal in CIJournal: Test only the Journal in CI
|
Blocked until zinc-collective#2160 is merged into |
zspencer
added a commit
to zinc-collective/convene
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2024
While working on zinc-collective#11, I completely forgot to run the tests locally. Embaressing, right? But I've grown overly used to codebases where running tests takes minutes-not-seconds; and there's not an easy way to "scope" the tests run to just the code that matters. Also I'm hacking while high, sue me! Anyway, people forget things... For reasons. And this time I forgot this, which exposed a hole in the safety-net in my weird multi-repo experiment. So I patched the hole in the bottom of the sea... sea: zinc-collective#12 Which uncovered a log in the hole in the bottom of the sea: #2160 So now I'm finishing the refactor and putting the frog on the log in the hole of the bottom of the sea, so that I can feed a gnat to the frog on the log in the hole of the bottom of the sea and implement the form fields to capture the `Entry#summary`
zspencer
added a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jan 29, 2024
While working on #11, I completely forgot to run the tests locally. Embaressing, right? But I've grown overly used to codebases where running tests takes minutes-not-seconds; and there's not an easy way to "scope" the tests run to just the code that matters. Also I'm hacking while high, sue me! Anyway, people forget things... For reasons. And this time I forgot this, which exposed a hole in the safety-net in my weird multi-repo experiment. So I patched the hole in the bottom of the sea... sea: #12 Which uncovered a log in the hole in the bottom of the sea: zinc-collective#2160 So now I'm finishing the refactor and putting the frog on the log in the hole of the bottom of the sea, so that I can feed a gnat to the frog on the log in the hole of the bottom of the sea and implement the form fields to capture the `Entry#summary`
zspencer
force-pushed
the
journal/entry-summaries
branch
from
e6aa446
to
06842f5
Compare
While working on #11, I realized I missed a piece of the refactor because I was leaning-on-ci as a way to confirm that everything was working as expected. Little did I know, CI was not working in this fork. Which makes sense, because you don't want to automatically turn on all the Workflows when you fork a project. This adds a Github Workflow for testing *just* the `Journal`, which should make detecting oopsie-daisys a bit easier for folks who are only interested in working on the Journal.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
While working on
#11, I realized I missed a piece of the refactor because I was leaning-on-ci as a way to confirm that everything was working as expected.
Little did I know, CI was not working in this fork. Which makes sense, because you don't want to automatically turn on all the Workflows when you fork a project.
This adds a Github Workflow for testing just the
Journal, which should make detecting oopsie-daisys a bit easier for folks who are only interested in working on the Journal.