Skip to content

Conversation

@joao-paulo-parity
Copy link
Contributor

@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity commented Oct 20, 2021

In situations such as the one described in #3, it might be necessary to skip the companion checks due to shortcomings of the companion build system (#3 (comment)).

Given that PRs are blocked at the moment due to this shortcoming, we should provide a way of bypassing the check until a proper solution can be implemented, meaning this change can and should be removed at some point.

Solution: from now on people will be able to say skip check-dependent-cumulus or whatever and then the check will be skipped.

related to #3

overcome the companion build system's shortcomings: #3 (comment)
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity force-pushed the workaround-transitive-companions branch from 864cda9 to ba07a72 Compare October 20, 2021 12:38
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity requested review from TriplEight and paritytech-ci and removed request for paritytech-ci October 20, 2021 12:38
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity changed the title Workaround transitive companions Work around transitive companions Oct 20, 2021
Copy link
Contributor

@gilescope gilescope left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Escape hatches are good for now.

Copy link
Contributor

@TriplEight TriplEight left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

You realize that this hotfix will bypass the required job as completed and potentially leads to skipping the job in other "inconvenient" cases, right?

@joao-paulo-parity
Copy link
Contributor Author

joao-paulo-parity commented Oct 20, 2021

You realize that this hotfix will bypass the required job as completed and potentially leads to skipping the job in other "inconvenient" cases, right?

@TriplEight Of course this solution is sloppy and terrible in general but people are blocked by this right now and we do not have a solution ready (not even work-in-progress either), so it is justified. This kind of thing should be removed as soon as something better comes along.

@gilescope gilescope merged commit 676e279 into master Oct 20, 2021
@joao-paulo-parity joao-paulo-parity deleted the workaround-transitive-companions branch May 19, 2022 15:39
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.

4 participants