Skip to content

Conversation

@carlossanlop
Copy link
Contributor

There are some on pull_request_target types in the label checking yml files that I removed but they are actually necessary, so the labeler keeps working after for example: pushing new commits, pressing the update the branch, closing and opening the PR.

Will backport too.

@carlossanlop carlossanlop self-assigned this Apr 2, 2025
@Copilot Copilot AI review requested due to automatic review settings April 2, 2025 18:42
@carlossanlop carlossanlop requested review from a team and jeffhandley as code owners April 2, 2025 18:42
Copy link
Contributor

Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR restores additional pull_request_target event types in label checking workflows to ensure that label checks run on a wider set of PR events (opened, edited, reopened, synchronize, in addition to labeled and unlabeled).

  • Extended event types in both workflows
  • Ensured consistency across different branches for label-related triggers

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 2 out of 2 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

File Description
.github/workflows/check-service-labels.yml Added extra pull request event types to trigger label checks on release branches
.github/workflows/check-no-merge-label.yml Updated event types to include additional PR actions for better label check coverage on main and release branches
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (2)

.github/workflows/check-service-labels.yml:8

  • Ensure that the added event types like 'edited', 'reopened', and 'synchronize' are properly handled by the label checking logic to prevent unexpected workflow runs.
types: [opened, edited, reopened, labeled, unlabeled, synchronize]

.github/workflows/check-no-merge-label.yml:8

  • Verify that triggering the workflow on these additional events does not lead to duplicate or conflicting executions, especially with the 'main' branch configuration.
types: [opened, edited, reopened, labeled, unlabeled, synchronize]

@dotnet-policy-service
Copy link
Contributor

Tagging subscribers to this area: @dotnet/runtime-infrastructure
See info in area-owners.md if you want to be subscribed.

@carlossanlop
Copy link
Contributor Author

carlossanlop commented Apr 2, 2025

@dotnet/dotnet-diag do we need the diagnostics CI leg running in PRs with just workflow yaml changes? I noticed it ran here but not in my backports: #114166 #114167 so maybe it's a setting we can configure to prevent such runs.

@steveisok
Copy link
Member

@dotnet/dotnet-diag do we need the diagnostics CI leg running in PRs with just workflow yaml changes? I noticed it ran here but not in my backports: #114166 #114167 so maybe it's a setting we can configure to prevent such runs.

It shouldn't run unless manually triggered. Not sure why since the pipline trigger is none.

@mdh1418
Copy link
Member

mdh1418 commented Apr 2, 2025

@dotnet/dotnet-diag do we need the diagnostics CI leg running in PRs with just workflow yaml changes? I noticed it ran here but not in my backports: #114166 #114167 so maybe it's a setting we can configure to prevent such runs.

It shouldn't run unless manually triggered. Not sure why since the pipline trigger is none.

Could Component Governance have forced the pipeline to run? Looking at the job preparation parameters, it's the only one that had steps. Would that override the trigger: none?

@steveisok
Copy link
Member

Could Component Governance have forced the pipeline to run? Looking at the job preparation parameters, it's the only one that had steps. Would that override the trigger: none?

It doesn't appear to me to be all that structurally different than the codeql pipeline and it does not run on PR's.

https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/blob/main/eng/pipelines/runtime-codeql.yml

@carlossanlop carlossanlop merged commit ff749c3 into dotnet:main Apr 2, 2025
18 checks passed
@carlossanlop carlossanlop deleted the LabelCheckingTypes branch April 2, 2025 20:20
@github-actions github-actions bot locked and limited conversation to collaborators May 3, 2025
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.

Projects

Status: Done

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants