-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 16.4k
Use explicit and easier to use runs-on approach for CI workflows #38601
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
Use explicit and easier to use runs-on approach for CI workflows #38601
Conversation
90218a9 to
44befd2
Compare
44befd2 to
472a2e7
Compare
|
This one also looks good-to-go with much easier way to manage what runners are used (and I am going to have some follow-ups once this is better organized). |
472a2e7 to
a0b3924
Compare
6ad6c1b to
f5e2602
Compare
|
Green :) |
b609874 to
6871245
Compare
Yep. good point. I also reverted the sequenece and we have now: |
f9987ef to
e036e8c
Compare
|
I think I figured it .... 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 🤯 |
e036e8c to
8a55f69
Compare
|
Also I standardized |
Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we
choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners.
So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit
inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings
and the `run-as` accepts array of strings (labels) - so we were
using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on
inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection.
However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and
that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings
directly and some of those were hard-coded.
This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce
consistent approach:
* build info have no selective checks results yet, so for them
runs-on is hardcoded
* similarly for "windows" and release jobs that are manually run
without running selective checks
* selective checks will produce three outuputs - JSON stringiified
array of labels:
* default (one that is selected depending on who runs the build)
* public (for cases where we want to force the builds to use public
runners
* self-hosted (for cases where we want to force the builds to use
self-hosted runners
* all the outputs are named `<type>-runs-on-as-string` to make it clear
they are all strings
* all inputs of workflows expectings strings are named the same (with
as-string suffix and <type> prefix)
* whenever a job is run, we pass "runs-on" parameter to be `fromJSON`
with appropriate type we want to use passed as input
This will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type
of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more
flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own
K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners
or self-hosted runners.
8a55f69 to
1a9c8b7
Compare
) Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners. So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings and the `run-as` accepts array of strings (labels) - so we were using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection. However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings directly and some of those were hard-coded. This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce consistent approach: * build info have no selective checks results yet, so for them runs-on is hardcoded * similarly for "windows" and release jobs that are manually run without running selective checks * selective checks will produce three outuputs - JSON stringiified array of labels: * default (one that is selected depending on who runs the build) * public (for cases where we want to force the builds to use public runners * self-hosted (for cases where we want to force the builds to use self-hosted runners * all the outputs are named `<type>-runs-on-as-string` to make it clear they are all strings * all inputs of workflows expectings strings are named the same (with as-string suffix and <type> prefix) * whenever a job is run, we pass "runs-on" parameter to be `fromJSON` with appropriate type we want to use passed as input This will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners or self-hosted runners. (cherry picked from commit 9da08a5)
Depending on selective checks, but also on the job executed, we choose whether to run job on public runners or self-hosted runners. So far the set of labels to select the runners were passed in a bit inconsistent way. Outputs of selective checks can only be strings and the
run-asaccepts array of strings (labels) - so we were using fromJSON to convert between the two. And we used runs-on inputs on a number of our workflows to pass the selection.However this meant that runs-on could be either string or array and that sometimes we passed public/self-hosted labels as strings directly and some of those were hard-coded.
This PR changes it consistently across the board to introduce consistent approach:
<type>-runs-on-as-stringto make it clear they are all stringsfromJSONwith appropriate type we want to use passed as inputThis will make it easier to reason on which job is using which type of runner and it will make it easier in the future to make it more flexible when we add ASF self-hosted runners and possibly our own K8S runners, or when we would want to change labels for public runners or self-hosted runners.
^ Add meaningful description above
Read the Pull Request Guidelines for more information.
In case of fundamental code changes, an Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) is needed.
In case of a new dependency, check compliance with the ASF 3rd Party License Policy.
In case of backwards incompatible changes please leave a note in a newsfragment file, named
{pr_number}.significant.rstor{issue_number}.significant.rst, in newsfragments.