Skip to content

V3 workflow update#57

Closed
jiangy10 wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
v3-workflow
Closed

V3 workflow update#57
jiangy10 wants to merge 4 commits into
mainfrom
v3-workflow

Conversation

@jiangy10

@jiangy10 jiangy10 commented Jun 2, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This is a update for version 3 workflow for all default content repos. By centralizing the lint and post-lint-report workflows, these ymls can be removed from content repo and no longer needed to be maintained by content repo authors.

@jiangy10 jiangy10 marked this pull request as draft June 2, 2026 20:23
@melissag-ensemble melissag-ensemble dismissed their stale review June 2, 2026 21:32

Withdrawing naming suggestions — pr-validation and pr-comment are consistent with each other and follow a common convention.

@melissag-ensemble melissag-ensemble left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Couple of changes needed before this is ready:

  1. Add the deploy.yml fork guard to this PR. commerce-testing #186 added github.repository_owner == 'AdobeDocs' to the deployment job's if:, but deploy.yml isn't in this PR. The update-bot syncs deploy.yml from dev-docs-template@main, so the guard needs to live here or every commerce repo gets the un-guarded version. One-line change on deploy.yml#30: Retracted — #57 (comment)

if: github.repository_owner == 'AdobeDocs' && github.actor != 'adp-devsite-app[bot]' && github.repository != 'AdobeDocs/dev-docs-template'
2. Branch protection. This deletes lint.yml + post-lint-comment.yml. If the commerce repos have Lint as a required check, PRs will sit pending forever once it stops reporting. Can you add a note to the v3 update announcement telling repo owners to swap their required checks from Lint → PR validation / PR Comment?

@jiangy10

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Not sure adding github.repository_owner == 'AdobeDocs' is that necessary since I think this is just a try out by Dima, see chats here : https://adobeio.slack.com/archives/C03AVNFAA8Y/p1781035087879379?thread_ts=1780413572.149809&cid=C03AVNFAA8Y, the appropriate fix has already been merged to deploy-v2 on our workflow repo

@jiangy10

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

And thanks for the branch protection, since this v3 update involves a deletion action to lint.yml, I'm imaging that once lint.yml is removed, the lint branch protection rule should go away maybe?

@jiangy10 jiangy10 closed this Jun 15, 2026
@jiangy10 jiangy10 reopened this Jun 15, 2026
@melissag-ensemble

melissag-ensemble commented Jun 15, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I'm imaging that once lint.yml is removed, the lint branch protection rule should go away maybe?

I don't think it auto-updates — per GitHub's docs, branch protection matches required checks by name (Lint), not by file. So deleting lint.yml just leaves a required check that never reports, and PRs stay blocked. We'd need to manually swap Lint → PR validation per content repo.

@melissag-ensemble

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Not sure adding github.repository_owner == 'AdobeDocs' is that necessary since I think this is just a try out by Dima, see chats here : https://adobeio.slack.com/archives/C03AVNFAA8Y/p1781035087879379?thread_ts=1780413572.149809&cid=C03AVNFAA8Y, the appropriate fix has already been merged to deploy-v2 on our workflow repo

Ah good point — then this PR's good for the commerce rollout. I did file DEVSITE-2467 for the deploy job showing green when it's effectively skipped (a cancelled/grey state would be a clearer signal it didn't actually run)

@melissag-ensemble melissag-ensemble self-requested a review June 15, 2026 20:04
@jiangy10 jiangy10 closed this Jun 15, 2026
@jiangy10 jiangy10 deleted the v3-workflow branch June 15, 2026 21:27
@jiangy10 jiangy10 mentioned this pull request Jun 15, 2026
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.

2 participants