Skip to content

Conversation

njjetha
Copy link

@njjetha njjetha commented Aug 11, 2025

Summary

qcom-preflight-checks calls a reusable-workflow that runs a series of preflight checks on your proposed contribution.

For more info check https://github.com/qualcomm/qcom-actions/blob/main/README.md

stale:
runs-on: ubuntu-latest
steps:
- uses: actions/stale@v9
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

why are we duplicating this job here instead of reusing https://github.com/qualcomm/qcom-reusable-workflows/blob/main/.github/workflows/stale-issues.yaml ? that would require updating the version in each repo. We could add input params for days-before-stale, .. so that the calling workflow can configure it?

Copy link
Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Great suggestions! We'll review and incorporate them in the next release
FYI, @mynameistechno

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah potentially. The stale issues functionality is more of a recommendation/suggestion vs some of the other compliance/security checks in qcom preflight checks. When we added the stale issues workflow in the repo template, we didn't have the reusable workflow available to us as an option at the time ... so we could set it up similarly where folks can disable it and also pass inputs down to it etc.

When thinking about if this is something we'd generally like to have enabled across all our repos, I think the answer is yes. I think we can add it with some sane defaults that are not very aggressive. I do also kind of like the idea of having just one workflow file in the template repo :P

exempt-issue-labels: bug,enhancement
exempt-pr-labels: bug,enhancement
days-before-stale: 30
days-before-close: 5
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why? It was 7 before, made more sense.

Replace Repolinter workflow with a centralized set of compliance and
security validations. Support project-specific exclusions for non-
applicable checks. Add reusable workflow to streamline maintenance and
ensure consistency across repositories.

Signed-off-by: Neeraj Jetha <[email protected]>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants