ci: fix skipping logic#1869
Merged
Merged
Conversation
In #1866 I introduced logic to skip builds and tests when a previous workflow run already succeeded for the same commit. However, the original revision of that Pull Request tried something _even more_ elaborate, and when I dropped that elaborate logic (because it is a bit fragile), I made a mistake in the replacement logic. The `run.status` can never be `success`, it can be `completed` and _`run.conclusion`_ can be `success`. So let's test for that instead ;-) Signed-off-by: Johannes Schindelin <johannes.schindelin@gmx.de>
mjcheetham
approved these changes
Sep 16, 2025
This file contains hidden or 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
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
In #1866 I introduced logic to skip builds and tests when a previous workflow run already succeeded for the same commit.
However, the original revision of that Pull Request tried something even more elaborate, and when I dropped that elaborate logic (because it is a bit fragile), I made a mistake in the replacement logic.
The
run.statuscan never besuccess, it can becompletedandrun.conclusioncan besuccess. So let's test for that instead ;-)