DanielLeens commented on PR #13012: URL: https://github.com/apache/seatunnel/pull/13012#issuecomment-6607573700
Thanks @MindOfqc for the correction, you are right that the state moved after my review. I re-checked head `5ca1cd51294fe9a0d48945f2fb7d1fa728e85b43`: the Apache-side `Build` check is now `action_required` with "Workflow run detection failed", `PR signal` is `success`, and the fork's run history still stops at `2026-10-29T18:18:19Z` (8 runs total), so none of your five later pushes produced a run. I agree with your reading: syncing to the latest `dev` or pushing an empty commit would not start a run while Actions is blocked on the fork, so please do not touch the head for now. The minimum-cost next step is to file the GitHub Support case you drafted (repo-scoped `422 Actions has been disabled` on dispatch while `GET .../actions/permissions` reports `enabled: true`). Once Actions runs on the fork again, start `Build` from the fork's Actions tab for this head (or push one empty commit), and the scheduled `Update build status workflow` should adopt it. A sync with `dev` is only needed if that run fails for a reason already fixed on `dev`. Nothing has changed on the source side: my previous conclusion still stands, and the exact-head `Build` (including the new MySQL IT) remains the only gate from my side. One small note for @SEZ9's first point: your 11:22 comment reports `Tests run: 127, Failures: 0, Errors: 0, Skipped: 0` in full, so the `Tests run: 1` was a preview truncation; the F1-F6 mapping is still yours to answer. -- 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]
