-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 15
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
Add action outputs #64
Comments
Interesting idea! Would love to hear more about the workflow itself. Is the expectation that users that open PRs containing breaking changes should immediately bump the version number in the |
Actually I just want to have a sticky comment in the pull request saying that there are some changes that breaks the semver compatibility. Similar to this one: ratatui/ratatui#769 (comment) I think this makes the error more visible and you don't have to go into the CI logs to figure out what's wrong. I especially want to have this for |
Absolutely. I want the same thing. In my mind, this kind of workflow would want to compare the PR branch to the target branch — e.g. Also, in addition to the sticky comment, I'd love to have the action flag the specific lines where each issue is happening. This way you can see "this specific function wants more args" as opposed to having to look up the file and function yourself. When I last looked into this, it seemed surprisingly hard to make GitHub comments on the "left side" (the "deleted" side) of a PR. Most linters only comment on the new code so that's what GitHub supports best, but Bottom line: I'd love to have this workflow work well, and I'd love to work with you on it if you'd be up for that! |
I agree that this should be the behavior. Currently I'm running this action for every push to the git-cliff repository and I'm getting a failure each time since it is comparing against the crates.io version. Using the main branch as the baseline would solve this problem and I'd get notified about the semver breakage only once.
Definitely.
Having this would be really nice! I think I've seen similar things but I need to think a bit - can't say a name of a tool off the top of my head now. But it should be doable I reckon.
I'm up for it! I think I can first tackle #15 - added it to my hacking list :D What do you think? |
Sounds great! Feel free to ping me anytime if a second pair of eyes could be useful. There are two classes of problems I was worried about in #15 that would be great to have test cases for:
I still believe this is all solvable. But annoying plumbing will definitely be involved too. |
Hey! 🐻
I would like to use the output of
cargo-semver-checks-action
in other steps/jobs as follows:But it does not set any outputs (i.e.
outputs.error_message
) so I cannot achieve this.Inspiration: https://github.com/amannn/action-semantic-pull-request?tab=readme-ov-file#outputs
Can we get this feature in? What do you think?
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: