This is the one that produces those bot comments) > The PR is likely OK to be merged with just subset of tests for default Python and Database versions without running the full matrix of tests, because it does not modify the core of Airflow. If the committers decide that the full tests matrix is needed, they will add the label 'full tests needed'. Then you should rebase to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease.
in most cases or > The PR is likely ready to be merged. No tests are needed as no important > environment files, nor python files were modified by it. However, committers might decide that full test matrix is needed and add the 'full tests needed' label. Then you should rebase it to the latest main or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease. and sets "ok to merge" or > The PR most likely needs to run full matrix of tests because it modifies > parts of the core of Airflow. However, committers might decide to merge it quickly and take the risk. If they don't merge it quickly - please rebase it to the latest main at your convenience, or amend the last commit of the PR, and push it with --force-with-lease. and sets "full tests needed" It does it based on the heuristics of what files were modified in the PR. I believe (and maybe that's the reason you have not seen it) - we, ve all developed a sort of blind spot for it. Those messages are anyhow useful (or supposed to be useful) for committers to guide them in their merging decisions, but I **think** we are able to judge ourselves and even if we make mistake, no real harm is done (except occasional full-test-matrix failures). J. On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 5:57 PM Daniel Standish <[email protected]> wrote: > > I never noticed this one.... but on the topic of useless CI checks Up-to-date > checker seems like a strong candidate for removal for similar reasons. > > On Sat, Jun 25, 2022 at 2:26 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Hey all, >> >> I think this workflow we have in CI is rather useless now. >> It has been somewhat useful at some point in the past when we tried to >> automate CI checks and see if we can get more info if the PR needs >> more thorough check (i.e. whether it touches core airflow, or whether >> it requires "full tests" but there are few problems: >> >> * it introduces a lot of noise >> * it's not 100% foolproof - there are both false positives and false >> negatives >> * we can (and sometimes do) manually set the "full test needed" label >> for PRs that need more "thorough" CI check before merge >> >> I personally see that as mostly noise for quite some time now and I >> see no value in it. Anyone disagree? >> >> Should we remove it ? >> >> J.
