Skip to content

feat: do not run commitlint on draft MRs#405

Merged
zachariahmiller merged 2 commits intomainfrom
willswire-patch-1
Feb 7, 2025
Merged

feat: do not run commitlint on draft MRs#405
zachariahmiller merged 2 commits intomainfrom
willswire-patch-1

Conversation

@willswire
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Description

commitlint shouldn't run on draft MRs in GitLab

Checklist before merging

  • ADR proposed if making an architectural change to the repo
  • Tests run, docs added or updated as needed

@willswire willswire requested review from a team as code owners February 6, 2025 18:34
@willswire willswire requested review from a team February 6, 2025 18:34
@zachariahmiller
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

I'll let others weigh in if they have opinions, but especially in the case of using fleeting runners i think this change makes sense if only to reduce the extra compute cost of spinning up a vm to run commitlint on the draft.

I dont see why this wouldnt work, but since this wont get directly tested from github, @willswire have you tested this in your environment and it works as expected including the job actually triggering when you convert from draft?

@willswire
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

willswire commented Feb 6, 2025

GitLab pipelines won't trigger when MR metadata changes (see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/25426 for example), however if a passing pipeline is required, users can just rerun the failed job once the title has changed.

I'll give it a whirl here on GitLab shortly by pointing to this ref.

@zachariahmiller
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

zachariahmiller commented Feb 6, 2025

GitLab pipelines won't trigger when MR metadata changes (see https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/25426 for example), however if a passing pipeline is required, users can just rerun the failed job once the title has changed.

I'll give it a whirl here on GitLab shortly by pointing to this ref.

Sounds good and yeah that makes sense we're already tracking that issue it just wasnt in the forefront of my mind when i asked. Hopefully it gets resolved sooner rather than later.

Since this is already a known gap requiring an upstream fix i think its kind of a moot point for the time being and as long as your testing doesn't bubble up some other unexpected behavior we should go ahead and make this change.

@willswire
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

No issues found in my tests.

@zachariahmiller
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

No issues found in my tests.

I approved i'll wait until tomorrow in case anyone else wanted to weigh in before merging but should be good to go.

@zachariahmiller zachariahmiller merged commit a1c0aaa into main Feb 7, 2025
@zachariahmiller zachariahmiller deleted the willswire-patch-1 branch February 7, 2025 19:22
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants