Skip to content
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

Skip ci of govuln for md/svg/png. #17545

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

liangyuanpeng
Copy link
Contributor

@liangyuanpeng liangyuanpeng commented Mar 7, 2024

Skip CI govuln for markdown & svg & png, avoid PRs like #17544 and #17542 being interfered by red CI.

Please read https://github.com/etcd-io/etcd/blob/main/CONTRIBUTING.md#contribution-flow.

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link

Hi @liangyuanpeng. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a etcd-io member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@liangyuanpeng liangyuanpeng force-pushed the skip_govuln_doc branch 2 times, most recently from 2be4172 to 5181665 Compare March 7, 2024 13:33
@ahrtr
Copy link
Member

ahrtr commented Mar 7, 2024

Thanks for the PR.

I tend to always perform CVE check, so that we are all well aware of any CVE and push us to release a patch if needed.

Copy link
Member

@jmhbnz jmhbnz left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hey @liangyuanpeng - Thanks for raising this idea.

My preference would be to keep this functionality as is. Having a non code pr fail a workflow might sometimes be the only signal we get that a CVE has emerged, depending on how often pr's are being raised.

Let's prioritise continuing to get these security signals as early as possible imo.

@liangyuanpeng
Copy link
Contributor Author

Make sense. closing..

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants