Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

fix(ci): correct typo in GitHub workflow #9276

Draft
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

sellout
Copy link
Contributor

@sellout sellout commented Feb 19, 2025

Introduced by #9257, but overlooked because the workflow runs asynchronously. (Is there a way to get GitHub to validate workflow files in a PR check, rather than only when the workflow runs?)

Introduced by ZcashFoundation#9257, but overlooked because the workflow runs asynchronously. (Is there a way to get
GitHub to validate workflow files in a PR check, rather than only when the workflow runs?)
@github-actions github-actions bot added the C-trivial Category: A trivial change that is not worth mentioning in the CHANGELOG label Feb 19, 2025
@sellout
Copy link
Contributor Author

sellout commented Feb 19, 2025

I’m also still having other workflows fail on my fork, like

  1. https://github.com/sellout/zebra/actions/runs/13321555857 and
  2. https://github.com/sellout/zebra/actions/runs/13321555854

Both complain “This request was automatically failed because there were no enabled runners online to process the request for more than 1 days.” and have runners listed as “ubuntu-latest-xl” and “ubuntu-latest-m”, which I can’t find any info on. I’m guessing they’re either runners only available to paid accounts at a certain level, or maybe self-hosted or something?

Forks generally don’t have issues enabled, so jobs that try to create an issue will fail there.
@sellout
Copy link
Contributor Author

sellout commented Feb 19, 2025

This is in draft as I wait for async jobs to run on my fork.

@gustavovalverde
Copy link
Member

gustavovalverde commented Feb 19, 2025

(Is there a way to get GitHub to validate workflow files in a PR check, rather than only when the workflow runs?)

We have an action linter, it's odd it didn't catch the extra ' (I recently merged a PR with that fix)

Both complain “This request was automatically failed because there were no enabled runners online to process the request for more than 1 days.” and have runners listed as “ubuntu-latest-xl” and “ubuntu-latest-m”, which I can’t find any info on. I’m guessing they’re either runners only available to paid accounts at a certain level, or maybe self-hosted or something?

Oh, those are GitHub Larger Runners (you can name them as you wish). So this will be an interesting thing to find a workaround. I'll have a look after the DevOps community call

@sellout
Copy link
Contributor Author

sellout commented Feb 19, 2025

Oh, those are GitHub Larger Runners (you can name them as you wish). So this will be an interesting thing to find a workaround. I'll have a look after the DevOps community call

I think they could be skipped the same way (checking the repo owner == 'ZcashFoundation'), but if there’s a way to preserve them on forks, even better. Checking the repo owner would still allow them to run on PRs againt this repo.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
C-trivial Category: A trivial change that is not worth mentioning in the CHANGELOG
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants