don't require github templates to go through transcript runner #6000
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Overview
What does this change accomplish and why?
Why: Make transcripts idempotent #5406 also introduced that docs and GitHub templates would be run through the transcript runner. I think it was to give more ambient testing of the transcript parser; but it made it so that we couldn't just edit the docs and templates without rerunning the transcripts, to satisfy the other rule that transcript outputs should be up to date in PRs.
What: Don't do that anymore. It was partially reverted in Don’t treat docs as transcripts #5903 (docs) and recently worked around in run transcripts #5996. This PR removes the Github templates from the transcript list too.
i.e. How does it change the user experience?
No impact on Unison users
i.e. What was the old behavior/API and what is the new behavior/API?
n/a
Include "before and after" examples if appropriate. (You can copy/paste screenshots directly into this editor.)
List any Github issues that this PR closes, in closing-issues-using-keywords format.
Implementation approach and notes
Interesting/controversial decisions
I left in the call to the empty list, in case we want to manually add some documents back later.
Test coverage
Have you included tests (which could be a transcript) for this change, or is it somehow covered by existing tests?
it's more of a CI issue
Would you recommend improving the test coverage (either as part of this PR or as a separate issue) or do you think it’s adequate?
n/a
If you only tested by hand, because that's all that's practical to do for this change, mention that. Include screenshots.
tested by hand with
./scripts/check.shand it didn't recreate any of the corresponding output files in my working dir. 👍Loose ends
n/a
Final checklist