meel-ayush commented on code in PR #76957:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/76957#discussion_r4563421492
##########
.github/workflows/ci-amd.yml:
##########
@@ -1724,6 +1750,7 @@ jobs:
- migration-round-trip
- mypy-providers
- providers
+ - providers-branch-tip
Review Comment:
Yes, moving it out of `ci-passed` / `check-timed-out-jobs` and into
`notify-slack`'s `needs` is 100% the right architecture.
The sole purpose of `ci-passed` is protecting `main` against regressions
introduced by the PR itself. Holding PRs on `main` hostage to external branch
churn on `v3-4-test` would cause unnecessary merge gridlock whenever `full
tests needed` is used. Having `notify-slack` wait on it directly gives the
exact behavior we want: scheduled canary runs will alert maintainers on Slack
if a backport breaks compatibility, without blocking unrelated PRs.
The tradeoff on workflow-modifying PRs is completely fine and standard in
Airflow—reviewers always inspect the individual check runs on workflow PRs
before approving anyway.
Also agree on keeping `${provider/./_}` in sync with `test-providers.yml`
for now and handling both in a follow-up, and good catch on GHA skipping
dependent jobs before matrix expansion. The PR is looking really solid!
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
