Repository navigation
Conversation
|
@HyukjinKwon the release GA job always use the scripts from the master branch? then this PR can be master only |
|
I'll merge this in to |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, script change itself is good but I would backport as @nchammas sugggested
Process note: .github/workflows/release.yml checks out the release branch and only overlays dev/create-release/spark-rm/Dockerfile.base from master. A 4.x finalize will keep the old two-commit website path unless this is backported to branch-4.x (and e.g. branches like branch-4.3 if those still cut releases in the future).
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
During a release, create only one spark-website commit and push.
In other words, instead of having both:
We'd have a single spark-website commit: "Update docs and website for Apache Spark 3.5.9"
Why are the changes needed?
There is no need for two separate commits. They appear to be a historical artifact rather than a conscious design choice.
The separate commits also make it more likely that someone will later inadvertently re-introduce the double push that we eliminated in #59071, which may trigger some annoying push failures due to the new spark-website CI setup.
Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No.
How was this patch tested?
Tested locally via GitHub Copilot with a disposable Git repository and bare remote. The exact
git add .→git commit→git push origin HEAD:asf-siteflow successfully included documentation.md, generated docs, and nested assets in one commit. Also passedbash -nandgit diff --check.Was this patch authored or co-authored using generative AI tooling?
I wrote this with assistance from Github Copilot.