-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
fix(ci): prefix stainless branches with fork author #4187
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
fix(ci): prefix stainless branches with fork author #4187
Conversation
460da26 to
02caff8
Compare
✱ Stainless preview buildsThis PR will update the Edit this comment to update it. It will appear in the SDK's changelogs. ✅ llama-stack-client-go studio · code · diff
✅ llama-stack-client-node studio · code · diff
⏳ These are partial results; builds are still running. This comment is auto-generated by GitHub Actions and is automatically kept up to date as you push. |
5d9a402 to
7c4b5cb
Compare
ashwinb
left a comment
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.
Ah I see thanks!
7c4b5cb to
574dac4
Compare
|
OK I am landing this right now to unblock the other PR, but we can slightly clean this up later to reduce duplication. |
# What does this PR do? <!-- Provide a short summary of what this PR does and why. Link to relevant issues if applicable. --> Addresses feedback from #4187 (comment) <!-- If resolving an issue, uncomment and update the line below --> <!-- Closes #[issue-number] --> ## Test Plan <!-- Describe the tests you ran to verify your changes with result summaries. *Provide clear instructions so the plan can be easily re-executed.* -->
What does this PR do?
I believe that should avoid CI issues seen in #4173.
Error we see in Stainless logs:
The issue is that if a branch
fixexists,fix/<whatever>cannot be created (that's how git refs work unfortunately...). The fix in this PR is to ensure PRs from forks are using the author as a prefix.In addition we will do changes to the Stainless API to return better error messages here, it should have been a 4xx with a meaningful error, not a 500.
And we will likely need to delete the
fixbranch.Test Plan