Re: git: 6b96125afdf2 - main - cap_net.3: remove a copypasta
- In reply to: Alan Somers : "Re: git: 6b96125afdf2 - main - cap_net.3: remove a copypasta"
- Go to: [ bottom of page ] [ top of archives ] [ this month ]
Date: Thu, 07 Dec 2023 15:02:09 UTC
> On Dec 7, 2023, at 11:59 AM, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote: > > On Wed, Dec 6, 2023 at 6:55 PM Zhenlei Huang <zlei@freebsd.org <mailto:zlei@freebsd.org>> wrote: >> >> >> >>> On Dec 7, 2023, at 12:52 AM, Alan Somers <asomers@freebsd.org> wrote: >>> >>> The branch main has been updated by asomers: >>> >>> URL: https://cgit.FreeBSD.org/src/commit/?id=6b96125afdf245ae61dd82b59891ad0d6aab0066 >>> >>> commit 6b96125afdf245ae61dd82b59891ad0d6aab0066 >>> Author: Alan Somers <asomers@FreeBSD.org> >>> AuthorDate: 2023-12-05 23:23:29 +0000 >>> Commit: Alan Somers <asomers@FreeBSD.org> >>> CommitDate: 2023-12-06 16:51:37 +0000 >>> >>> cap_net.3: remove a copypasta >>> >>> This line appears to have been copied from cap_sysctl.3. While I'm >>> here, reorder and reword the description of cap_net_limit a bit. >>> >>> [skip ci] >> >> I guess we can 'skip ci' implicitly for document or typo changes. > > Can we? The skipping logic is builtin to Jenkins, Github Workflows, > and Cirrus. I don't think it would be easy to program any of those to > detect which changes can be safely skipped. Sorry for the misleading word 'can', I think it is accurate to reword it to 'want to'. 1. To detect document changes, I think checking the names of changed files is sufficient. 2. As for the typo change, we can check the commit log. A false detecting (if the change is SKIP CI candidate) does not hurt much, as it will be queued up to next running of CI. So I think the simple logic above is practical. > -Alan