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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Force creation of GitHub Actions CI workflow #1249

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 17, 2025
Merged

Force creation of GitHub Actions CI workflow #1249

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 17, 2025

Conversation

nickcharlton
Copy link
Member

Since we switched to using .yml for YAML files in #1246, generating the CI config would clash and request the user intervene. We force the template to overwrite instead.

Completes #1243.

@nickcharlton
Copy link
Member Author

I noticed this after generating a new application after merging a bunch of Rails 8.0 support PRs in. I don't know if there's actually a better way to approach this, or if there's a way we can test for it? Thoughts welcome!

We do no longer have any .yaml files (find . -name "*.yaml") left though after this.

@nickcharlton nickcharlton mentioned this pull request Feb 17, 2025
Closed
@nickcharlton nickcharlton force-pushed the nc-force-overwrite-of-ci-workflow branch from 9d15cda to 2fe319f Compare February 17, 2025 16:33
nickcharlton
nickcharlton commented Feb 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
stevepolitodesign
stevepolitodesign approved these changes Feb 17, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@stevepolitodesign stevepolitodesign left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Thank you! Just one minor comment worth considering, but not blocking.

@nickcharlton
Force creation of GitHub Actions CI workflow
76dc99e 
Since we switched to using `.yml` for YAML files in #1246, generating
the CI config would clash and request the user intervene. We force the
template to overwrite instead.

Completes #1243.
@nickcharlton nickcharlton force-pushed the nc-force-overwrite-of-ci-workflow branch from 756c4a8 to 76dc99e Compare February 17, 2025 17:14
@nickcharlton nickcharlton merged commit 7eabb4b into main Feb 17, 2025
2 checks passed
@nickcharlton nickcharlton deleted the nc-force-overwrite-of-ci-workflow branch February 17, 2025 17:17
@stevepolitodesign
Copy link
Contributor

@nickcharlton I'm just now realizing we haven't been updating NEWS.md with these changes. We should update it to reflect all the work you've done.

@nickcharlton
Copy link
Member Author

Oh yeah, we've not. I'm not sure what we usually do here, but I typically fill out a CHANGELOG when I cut a new release.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@stevepolitodesign stevepolitodesign stevepolitodesign approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@nickcharlton @stevepolitodesign