potiuk commented on issue #43498:
URL: https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/43498#issuecomment-2446157132

   Sure. That should be a simple change to selective checks.
   
   If you look at the https://github.com/apache/airflow/issues/43498 output 
(particularly in Bulid Info/ Selective checks) : 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/actions/runs/11237464231/job/31239971306?pr=42779
 at the output you will see this:
   
   
![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/67e478d6-ac36-4ccd-bc8d-b9e775fd4096)
   
   And then the reason why tests is that we cannot determine which tests to run 
in case only "new UI files change" :
   
![image](https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/fd036790-ddb6-43cf-bbdf-38c2072fd7d9)
   
   We simply have no check to see if only new UI changed . Generally the 
approach we have is that we handled all the "known" files and depending on a 
file type we classify it - and if there are any change to  files we have no 
idea about, we run "all tests" - just in case.
   
   It happens here: 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/4fc16f154d2a159dd52955b40d5ef440d3d82425/dev/breeze/src/airflow_breeze/utils/selective_checks.py#L804
   
   So the thing is ere that we should just add additional check here and if 
files changed match "UI files" - they should be added as "all_ui_files" and 
removed when we calculate remaining files. Then remaining files will be 0 and 
in turn only "Always" tests will run rather than all files.
   
   We could also add the test case here 
https://github.com/apache/airflow/blob/4fc16f154d2a159dd52955b40d5ef440d3d82425/dev/breeze/tests/test_selective_checks.py#L853
 to test that case.
   
   If anyone would like to implement it- happy to review  :)
   
   If someo 
   
   
   
   
   
   


-- 
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.

To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]

For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]

Reply via email to