Skip to content

Update GitHub workflows for rt pull requests#961

Merged
lsf37 merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
rt-proof-workflow
Feb 11, 2026
Merged

Update GitHub workflows for rt pull requests#961
lsf37 merged 2 commits intomasterfrom
rt-proof-workflow

Conversation

@lsf37
Copy link
Member

@lsf37 lsf37 commented Feb 11, 2026

GitHub Actions has changed its behaviour in how it processes pull_request_target PRs to a branch: it now seems to always run the contents of the workflow file from the master branch instead of the target branch. It says otherwise in the GUI when you display the workflow file it claims to run, but it's clearly not what is happening since that workflow file does not even contain the jobs that are being started.

The following seems to fix it:

  • add a separate workflow file to master that has content for the rt branch and an explicit branch filter for just rt
  • explicitly filter rt out from the triggers of the standard proof PR
  • add these change sets also to the rt branch for consistency

This does mean that rt proof checks will run only for PRs to the rt branch, not to branches that themselves branch off the rt branch (e.g. when you stack pull requests), because the branch names need to be listed in the trigger filters.

We could think a of a naming scheme for branches that do trigger rt tests. Maybe rt and rt-*?

Explicitly exclude the rt branch from the standard pull_request_target
trigger.

GitHub has changed its behaviour to using this workflow file instead of
the changed workflow file on the rt branch (despite claiming otherwise
in the GUI). This is an attempt to prevent that.

Signed-off-by: Gerwin Klein <[email protected]>
GitHub has changed its behaviour and seems to be ignoring the contents
of the workflow file on the rt branch, using the one on master instead.

This is an attempt to provide a workflow file with content that is
correct for the rt branch, but store it on the master branch.

Signed-off-by: Gerwin Klein <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@Xaphiosis Xaphiosis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there any corresponding github bug report? Any chance they'll fix it?

Also, is it worth having any kind of manual tag / trigger phrase for those stacked PRs?

Copy link
Member

@corlewis corlewis left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Very annoying that we have to do this.

And yeah, triggering on a naming scheme or a tag would be nice.

@lsf37
Copy link
Member Author

lsf37 commented Feb 11, 2026

Is there any corresponding github bug report? Any chance they'll fix it?

I have not found anything. But looking at the status page of GitHub is just horrific in its own right: https://www.githubstatus.com/history -- 19 incidents in February alone and that all just in the first 10 days of Feb.

Also, is it worth having any kind of manual tag / trigger phrase for those stacked PRs?

There is already a manual trigger for both workflow files, so in theory that part should work.

@lsf37 lsf37 merged commit 64ba2d3 into master Feb 11, 2026
14 checks passed
@lsf37 lsf37 deleted the rt-proof-workflow branch February 11, 2026 23:47
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants