-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.1k
fix: update owlbot configs to copy generated samples #8790
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.
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
Changes from 17 commits
2b8e5cc
15c2826
991a8cc
4feece0
4c67dc2
3d883eb
9b8156d
ce36f9b
f3e143e
0039f58
4642481
25328dd
2716226
e4d7275
bc35ecf
f0b589d
ef1119a
fdbc57b
70bf653
b05f060
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
| Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
|---|---|---|
| @@ -0,0 +1,6 @@ | ||
| #!/bin/bash | ||
|
|
||
| # Checks that each module's .OwlbotYaml file is correctly configured according to the template set in `set_owlbot_config.sh` | ||
|
|
||
| OWLBOT_FILE=$1 | ||
| for F in $(find . -maxdepth 2 -name '.OwlBot.yaml'); do sh generation/set_owlbot_config.sh "$F"; done | ||
|
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Since this actually modifies the files, and doesn't really check, I think the file name doesn't really make sense. Would it make sense to just add this loop to
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Hmm I see what you're saying; I did a little more digging and it looks like My sense is that actually would suffice as the check for the Owlbot.yaml files - what do you think?
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. That check doesn't apply to the entire repo and might go away in the future. I think the check your added is valuable beyond that.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Thanks for pointers offline - let me know if this update works!
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. This is good, but I think you need to update 2 places where this script is used:
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Ahhh good catch; I updated
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. I see that you updated
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. Right, never mind! I think it's still in my local for some reason. |
||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, this is what I had in mind. Thanks!