update PR link checker workflow #347
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Use a different changed-files checker (the old one was no longer maintained) and also make the link checking more fine-grained by only checking added lines for broken links. We now use a matrix to parallelize over changed files. This slows down the complete workflow a bit in some cases, but it does offer a nicer user experience, because the files that are checked will now be shown in the GitHub UI itself, instead of only in the workflow run logs. Lychee is installed directly from the GitHub nightly release. This is really fast. The original reason, though, was because there is no Ubuntu package for Lychee. Works out well, though. Determining the base SHA is a bit convoluted, because GitHub does not provide this in a usable way. See https://www.kenmuse.com/blog/the-many-shas-of-a-github-pull-request/ for a good overview of this problem. The git rev-parse command was suggested there. The fetch depth must be at least two, otherwise the base SHA cannot be used.
egpbos
force-pushed
the
update_link_checker_PR_workflow_squash
branch
from
7919971
to
f2b5aca
Compare
ewan-escience
approved these changes
Oct 2, 2024
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This change generates an error (see https://github.com/NLeSC/guide/actions/runs/11094013550), but I think that is because no MarkDown files have changed? So let's hope it works... 🤞
|
@ewan-escience ah that's sloppy, thanks. I hadn't noticed because the workflows themselves seem to pass, the error comes from the Actions execution backend it seems. |
|
Solution here dorny/paths-filter#66 |
Spotted in review by Ewan. Solution from dorny/paths-filter#66 (comment)
|
Nice, now it explicitly says it skips it. Btw, I tested the solution itself in my own fork: egpbos#1 You can see there how it should work here as well if I squashed things correctly 😄 I didn't want to pollute this PR with tests. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixes #345.
Use a different changed-files checker (the old one was no longer maintained) and also make the link checking more fine-grained by only checking added lines for broken links.
We now use a matrix to parallelize over changed files. This slows down the complete workflow a bit in some cases, but it does offer a nicer user experience, because the files that are checked will now be shown in the GitHub UI itself, instead of only in the workflow run logs.
Lychee is installed directly from the GitHub nightly release. This is really fast. The original reason, though, was because there is no Ubuntu package for Lychee. Works out well, though.
Determining the base SHA is a bit convoluted, because GitHub does not provide this in a usable way. See
https://www.kenmuse.com/blog/the-many-shas-of-a-github-pull-request/ for a good overview of this problem. The git rev-parse command was suggested there. The fetch depth must be at least two, otherwise the base SHA cannot be used.