Opened 12 months ago
Last modified 11 months ago
#59458 new defect (bug)
Duplicate PHP version in PHPUnit job names on GitHub Actions
Reported by: | SergeyBiryukov | Owned by: | |
---|---|---|---|
Milestone: | Future Release | Priority: | low |
Severity: | trivial | Version: | |
Component: | Build/Test Tools | Keywords: | |
Focuses: | Cc: |
Description
- Go to Commits page.
- Click on any of the GitHub Actions result icons (a green check mark or a red cross mark).
- Note the duplicate PHP version in the job names, e.g.:
PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.11 PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.11 multisite PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.4 PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.4 multisite PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.6 PHPUnit Tests / PHP 7.0 / PHP 7.0 / MariaDB 10.6 multisite ...
The same is displayed in GitHub Actions checks on individual PRs.
Appears to be related to [56439].
Attachments (3)
Change History (10)
#3
in reply to:
↑ 2
@
12 months ago
- Keywords has-patch needs-testing removed
Replying to desrosj:
When looking at a single workflow view, the only way to get the jobs to combine into a collapsible group is if the start of the name of the job within the called workflow matches the end of the job name in the calling one.
Ah, thanks for that context! The current patch won't work as expected then :)
#4
@
12 months ago
It would fix the issue on the PR and commit screens, but then on the individual workflow pages, there would just be one massive list of jobs.
This ticket was mentioned in Slack in #core by marybaum. View the logs.
11 months ago
Note: See
TracTickets for help on using
tickets.
This is an annoying inconsistency with how GitHub Actions handles callable workflows.
When looking at a single workflow view, the only way to get the jobs to combine into a collapsible group is if the start of the name of the job within the called workflow matches the end of the job name in the calling one.
It displays nicely on the individual workflow view, but not so much in the PR or commit views.
I've passed this along to GitHub, but haven't heard back yet. We could experiment a bit more to try and find a way around this, but I couldn't find a way. @johnbillion has also toyed around with this a bit, and arrived at the same approach.