Skip to content

Conversation

@alamb
Copy link
Contributor

@alamb alamb commented Aug 5, 2025

Which issue does this PR close?

  • Closes #.

Rationale for this change

We now broke CI twice in the last day with docs changes that did not run the config_docs check.

Here are two PRs that fixed it:

(Thanks to @liamzwbao and @adamreeve for pointing them out)

let's fix the docs check to automatically run on PRs that change the auto generated files

What changes are included in this PR?

  1. Move automatic generated CI check to a new file that also triggers when the docs are updated (in addition to the code)

Are these changes tested?

I am testing them manually

Are there any user-facing changes?

No, this is a CI process change only

@alamb alamb added the development-process Related to development process of DataFusion label Aug 5, 2025
- "docs/source/user-guide/configs.md"
- "docs/source/user-guide/sql/aggregate_functions.md"
- "docs/source/user-guide/sql/scalar_functions.md"
- "docs/source/user-guide/sql/window_functions.md"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Easy to miss adding a new document here.
Can we run this workflow on any changes to the user guide?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think these are the only files that are auto generated (and thus the only .md files that can be affected by the change in the rust code). I was trying to preserve the property that most changes to the docs did not require all the rust tests to be run

pull_request:
paths:
- ".github/**"
- "datafusion/**"
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Cargo.toml, cargo.lock, rust-toolchain.toml, ?

container:
image: amd64/rust
steps:
- uses: actions/checkout@11bd71901bbe5b1630ceea73d27597364c9af683 # v4.2.2
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I think actions/checkout is controlled by GitHub. I believe it's safe to use tag reference on this one and the setup-node as well.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This is copyied from the existing jobs

They were pinned to shas in this PR by @gopidesupavan i think as an added level of protection

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@findepi yes agree thought its managed from github tags will not protect us from any attacks if something wrong or anyone manipulates the pinned tag, commit sha is preffered way :) and its recommended way from ASF policy aswell https://infra.apache.org/github-actions-policy.html

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

i am well aware of 3rd party github actions being an "awesome" (easy) attack vector when they are not pinned to a sha. However, i think GH recommends this for 3rd party actions, not github-owned actions

from ASF page linked above

You MAY use all actions internal to the apache/, github/ and actions/* namespaces without restrictions.

You MUST pin all external actions to the specific git hash (SHA1) of

I interpret it as saying "actions./*" is "internal" and you don't need to pin to a sha.

While we MAY pin also internal actions, it can be viewed as unnecessary hassle when updating to a newer version.

@findepi findepi mentioned this pull request Aug 12, 2025
@github-actions
Copy link

Thank you for your contribution. Unfortunately, this pull request is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Please remove the stale label or comment or this will be closed in 7 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale PR has not had any activity for some time label Oct 18, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Oct 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

development-process Related to development process of DataFusion Stale PR has not had any activity for some time

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants