Replies: 4 comments 3 replies
-
How did you achieve this? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
2 replies
-
|
I should say +1 for such feature related to isaacs/github#1465 |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
1 reply
-
|
+1 - I thought we had this already, but maybe it was gitlab.... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
-
|
+1 this would be great |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
In our team we use Github Actions to run Checks on PRs.
Some of the checks block a merge when they fail. Some other checks can fail but don't block a merge.
Github already offers this functionality which is great.
The trouble we have is the checks that fail which don't block merges still have a big ❌ beside them which can look like there's a problem, even when the check could just be prompting the reviewer to take action rather than the developer e.g. Review a particular file in more detail for backwards compatibility.
It also results in that PR having an ❌ against it on summary screens such as
https://github.com/{org}/{repo}/pulls.The above all acts as a deterrent to potential reviewers as it may look like the PR isnt ready for review.
I would like to propose the introduction of an option for PR checks to fail with a user configurable ❌ or an⚠️ icon
An example of our use case

We have a Check which verifies if an open api spec has changed as part of a PR.
If that file has changed, the check currently fails which should prompt a reviewer to look at the changes to that file in detail for backwards compatibility.
The trouble is, from experience, when people see a ❌ they often think "The PR isn't ready for review" and stop their review, or hold off testing it.
If instead these optional checks could be configured to fail with⚠️ , and that icon propagates to summary screens (providing all other mandatory checks pass) then I believe reviewers would be more likely to review PRs which are in fact ready for review, but have warnings/actions attached.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions