ci: run PR coverage only on macos arm #4022
Open
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
| - uses: actions/checkout@v4 | ||
| if: steps.should-skip.outputs.skip != 'true' |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I vaguely remember trying to remove these and failing for some reason. Do you remember why we had these in the first place?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We can't reference the matrix in the usual job.if clause, so maybe we just hadn't worked out that we could use fromJson() to manage the matrix conditionally.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Related to #4017
macOS arm runners seem to be faster than ubuntu runners at present. Also our CI bottleneck is ubuntu runners, not macos arm runners.
I propose we move the coverage run on PR to macOS. I feel a little dirty doing this as it feels more pure to measure on linux, but we don't actually enforce coverage (it's just a heuristic) so overall reducing the load on CI seems reasonable.