For reference, here are the related PRs: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3102
https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3103 Cheers, Dmitri. On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 9:56 AM Pierre Laporte <[email protected]> wrote: > Approved to unblock CI. > > -- > > Pierre > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 3:47 PM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Let's merge this fix ASAP to unblock PRs and follow up with a nicer > > solution later. > > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 9:42 AM Dmitri Bourlatchkov <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > Indeed, markdown link checks are inherently flaky because they rely on > > > external resources to be cooperative. This hinders PR progress. > > > > > > Here's a recent example [1]: > > > > > > ERROR: 1 dead links found! > > > [✖] > > > https://medium.com/@jitenderkmr/demystifying-snowflake-ids-a-unique-identifier-in-distributed-computing-72796a827c9d > > → Status: 403 > > > > > > That link works fine in a browser. > > > > > > So +1 to remove markdown link checks (we can always fix when people > > report > > > dead links). > > > [1] > > > > > > https://github.com/apache/polaris/actions/runs/19534001072/job/55941993028?pr=2802 > > > > > > Cheers, > > > Dmitri. > > > > > > On Thu, Nov 20, 2025 at 6:12 AM Robert Stupp <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Hi all, > > >> > > >> As Adam recently mentioned [1], the "Check Markdown links" workflow is > > >> known to regularly produce false failures. > > >> > > >> It seems that some external sites have somewhat aggressive rate limits > > >> and/or bot protections in place that lead to these false failures. > > >> > > >> We cannot control nor work around those externally controlled things. > > >> PRs are getting blocked by these false failures. Retrying the workflow > > >> does not help. And if the mentioned assumptions are correct, retrying > > >> actually makes the (rate limit) situation even worse, leading to > > >> other/more false failures from "Check Markdown links". > > >> > > >> I propose to remove "Check Markdown links" from the required checks > > >> [2]. The workflow would still run, but not block PRs. Reviewers can > > >> still inspect and cross-check potential failures from that workflow. > > >> > > >> Thoughts? > > >> > > >> Robert > > >> > > >> [1] https://github.com/apache/polaris/issues/3097 > > >> [2] https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3102 > > >> > > > > > >
